Skip to main content

Full text of "Journal of early southern decorative arts [serial]"

See other formats 


JOURNAL  OF    EARLY 
SOUTHERN  DECORATIVE  ARTS 

SUMMER    1996         VOLUME    XXII.    NUMBER    I 


te. 
O 
p 


I- 
o 


ll. 
o 


THE    MUSEUM    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


EDITORIAL     BOARD 

Henry  Parrott  Bacot,  Louisiana  State  University  Aluseiim  of  An,  Baton  Rouge 

lohn  A.  Burrison,  Georgia  State  University,  Atlanta 

Colleen  Callahan,  Valentine  Mmeum,  Richmond,  Virginia 

Barbara  Carson,  College  of  William  and  Alary,  Williamsburg,  Virginia 

Bernard  D.  Cotton,  Buckinghamshire  College,  United  Kingdom 

Donald  L.  Fennimore,  In,  Winterthur  Museum,  Winterthur,  Delaware 

Leland  Ferguson,  University  of  South  Carolina,  Columbia 

Edward  G.  Hill,  M.D.,  Winston-Salem,  North  Carolina 

Ronald  L.  Hurst,  ('oloiiial  Williamsburg  Foundation,  Willatnsburg,  Virginia 

Theodore  Landsmark,  Mayor's  Office,  City  of  Boston,  Massachusetts 

Carl  R.  Lounsbury,  Colonial  Williamsburg  Foundation,  Willamsburg,  Virginia 

Susan  H.  Mvers,  National  Museum  of  American  History,  Smithsonian  Institution,  Washington,  D.C 

].  Garrison  Stradling,  New  York,  New  ]ark 

Carolyn  J.  Weekley,  Abby  Aldrich  Rockefeller  Folk  Art  Center,  Colonial  Williamsburg  Foundation, 

WilLvnsburg.  Virgi)iia 

GENERAL    EDITOR:    Bradford  L.  Rauschenberg 

MANAGING    EDITOR:    Cornelia  B.  Wright 

MEMBERSHIP     IN     MESDA 

Members  of  MESDA  receive  t\\e  fouriidl  of  Early  Southern  Decorative  Arts,  published  in  summer  and  win- 
ter, and  the  MESDA  newsletter,  fhe  Luminary,  published  in  spring  .ind  I,ill.  Other  privileges  include  notifi- 
cation ot  the  classes,  programs,  and  lectures  offered  by  the  Museum;  participation  in  Members'  Weekend, 
with  a  symposium  on  collecting  and  decorative  arts  research;  a  lO"..  discount  on  purchases  from  the  MESDA 
Bookstore  and  Old  Salem  stores;  and  tree  admission  to  general  tours  of  MESDA  and  Old  Salem. 

Membership  categories  begin  at  $30.00.  Library  subscriptions  are  $2s.oo  (oversees  members  please  add 
$10.00  lor  postage).  For  further  information  about  joining  Members  of  MESDA  and  benefits  of  membership, 
ple,ise  write  the  Coordinator  of  Membership  Services,  MESDA,  P.O.  Box  10310,  Winston-Salem,  NC  2~io8. 


lliistr.uion:  Corm-lnis  Schneder.  Mmuturc  Portrait  »t" an  L'nknown  Woman,  i.  iSio.  wMercolor  on  ivory.  HOA  2„".  W'OA  I  %" 
ureuiily)  Sigtieri/mver  right:  "C  S  "  Prmiti-  collniioii  AtRF  6.oo<?. 


THE  JOURNAL 

OF  EARLY  SOUTHERN 

DECORATIVE  ARTS 


SUMMER     1996 
VOLUME    XXII,     NUMBER    I 


The  Joimuil  of  Early  Soinhern  Dcrouun-e  Am  is  published  nvicc 

a  year  by  the  Museum  ot  Early  Southern  Decorative  Arts  (MESDA). 

It  presents  research  on  decorative  arts  made  in  the  South  prior  to  1820, 

with  an  emphasis  on  object  studies  in  a  material  culture  context. 

Potential  contributors  are  encouraged  to  contact  the  iManagin"  Editor 
for  guidelmes  concernuig  subiect  matter  and  manuscript  preparation. 

All  correspondence  concerning  \\\i:  journal  should  be  sent  to  the 

Managing  Editor,  Journal  of  Early  Southern  Decorative  Arts,  MESDA. 

P.O.  Box  10310.  Winston-Salem,  NC  27108.  Correspondence  concerning 

membership  in  MESDA,  including  renewals  and  address  changes, 

should  be  directed  to  the  Coordinator  ot  Membership  Services, 

MESDA,  P.O.  Box  10310,  Winston-Salem,  NC  2-10S. 

Articles  trom  the  Jaurnal  of  Early  Southern  Decoratire  Arts  iti:  abstracted 
in  the  Bihliographr  of  the  H:ston'  of  Art  and  Amerna:  History  and  Lifi\ 

The  paper  used  for  this  publication  meets  the  minimum  American 

National  Standard  for  information  Sciences — Permanence  ot  Paper  for 

Printed  Library  Materials,  ansi  Zi9. 48-1984.00 tm  and  contains  20% 

post-consumer  fiber. 

Some  back  issues  o(  ihc  Journal  are  available. 

ISSN  009S-9266 

Copyright  ©  1996  by  Old  Salem,  Inc. 

Designed  and  rv'peset  in  Adobe  Garamond  by  Kachergis  Book  Design, 

Pittsboro,  North  Carolina 

Printed  in  the  United  States  ot  .'Kmerica 


Contents 


Guy  Atkinson  and  the  Intinerant  Artists 
of  Fairfax  Street,  Alexandria 

MONA    L.    DEARBORN 


Furniture  of  the  North  Carolina  Roanoke 

River  Basin  in  the  Collection  of  Historic  Hope  Foundation 

jOHNBiviNS.jR.  42 

Research  Note 
The  Virginia  Career  of  Jacob  Marling 

J.    CHRISTIAN    KOLBE    &    LYNDON    H.     HART    III  QI 


Book  Reviews 

Barbara  Crawford  and  Royster  Lyle,  Jr., 
Rockbridge  County  Artists  and  Artisans 

WARREN     R.     HOFSTRA  IO5 

Aaron  Spencer  Fogleman,  Hopefid Journeys: 
German  Immigration,  Settlement,  and 
Political  Culture  in  Colonial  America,  ijij—ijj^ 

HELENE    M.     KASTINGER    RILEY  IIO 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 

University  of  North  Carolina  at  Chapel  Hill 


http://www.archive.org/details/journalofearlyso2211996muse 


Guy  Atkinson  and  the  Itinerant  Artists 
of  Fairfax  Street,  Alexandria 


MONA    L.     DEARBORN 


DURING  THE  FIRST  decades  of-  the  nineteenth  century, 
Alexandria,  Virginia,  was  a  stopping  place  tor  itinerant 
portrait  artists  traveling  north,  south,  or  west  to  find  work. 
Because  there  were  no  resident  artists  in  Alexandria  at  that  time, 
itinerant  artists  had  no  competition  unless  the  visits  of  r^vo  or  three 
of  them  happened  to  overlap.  An  artist  remained  in  the  town  as  long 
as  his  portrait  commissions  warranted — a  tew  days,  weeks,  or  even 
months. 

Eighteenth-  and  nineteenth-century  newspaper  notices  contain 
frequent  references  to  artists'  taking  up  residence  in  a  town  and  of- 
fering their  services  to  the  public.  By  collecting  and  comparing  this 
information,  a  picture  of  itinerant  artists'  housing  needs  and  net- 
works of  information  regarding  accommodation  can  be  sketched 
out.  This  article  will  explore  several  aspects  oi  the  itinerant  artist's 
experience  in  Alexandria:  the  characteristics  oi  a  "painting  room" 
that  an  artist  would  seek;  the  role  of  merchant  Guy  Atkinson 
(1758-1835)  in  Alexandria's  artistic  history;  and  a  look  at  the  painters 
who  stayed  in  rooms  owned  by  Atkinson  or  nearby  on  Fairfax  Street. 

One  of  the  very  real  problems  that  faced  an  itinerant  painter 
upon  arrival  in  a  new  town  or  city  was  finding  a  suitable  painting 
room,  which  often  served  as  his  lodging  as  well.  The  artist  required  a 
room  with  good  natural  light  that  was  located  in  the  center  of  town. 


There  are  many  accounts  detailing  this  difficulty  in  diaries,  journals, 
and  letters  of  itinerant  artists.  Elsewhere  in  Virginia,  John  Toole 
(1815-1860),  an  Irish  immigrant  painter,  described  graphically  his 
search  tor  such  a  room  in  a  letter  to  his  wife,  Jane: 

When  I  arrived  here,  I  used  every  effort  to  rent  a  suitable  room  for  paint- 
ing, in  a  suitable  part  of  the  City;  and  such  a  room  I  found  very  hard  to 
procure.  I  however,  finally  succeeded  in  renting  one  o\er  Duval's  Drug 
store,  near  the  Banks,  which  is  the  most  desirable  part  of  the  town.  ...  I 
have  a  very  large  commodious  room,  of  easy  access,  and  with  good  lights. 
I,  must  say,  however,  that  it  ought  to  possess  all  these  advantages  and 
even  more,  and  you  will  think  so  too  when  I  tell  you  that  I  have  to  pay 
twelve  dolls,  a  month  for  the  single  naked  room!  And  it  was  only  by  a 
strong  entreaty  that  I  could  rent  it  at  all.  It  was  Thursday  before  I  suc- 
ceeded, for  owing  to  mv  being  a  stranger  here,  1  did  not  know  where  to 
apply  in  search  of  vacant  rooms.  ...  1  shall  not  advertise  until  I  complete 
some  specimens. 

Painter  William  Dunlap  (1766-1839),  an  artist,  historian,  and 
playwright,  also  mentions  many  times  his  search  for  a  suitable  paint- 
ing room.  In  1806  in  Washington  City,  he  recorded  in  his  diary,  "Af- 
ter some  difficulties,  &  various  walks  to  the  Cit)',  I  have  hired  a 
Room  at  a  Hotel,  not  finding  one  at  a  private  House  to  suit.  I  am  to 
pay  sio.oo  per  Week,  for  lodging,  boarding,  fire  &  Candle,  having  a 
Chamber  to  myself."'  He  stayed  at  the  Semmes  Hotel.  In  Montreal 
on  16  August  1820,  Dunlap  noted,  "Make  unsuccessfull  efforts  to 
obtain  a  room  to  paint  in."  Two  days  later  he  recorded,  "Engaged  a 
painting  room  &  board  at  Mansion  House,  a  splendid  Hotel,  but 
cannot  take  possession  until  Monday  21st.' 

John  Wood  (1775-1822),  a  miniaturist  and  profilist,  advised  read- 
ers of  the  \'iygi)iia  Gazette  a)icl  Daily  Advertiser  on  26  October  1803 
that  his  "Polygraphic  Physiognotrace,"  advertised  previously  in 
handbills,  had  been  removed  to  "Haymarket  Gardens,  owing  to  the 
deficiency  of  light,  where  he  will  attend  every  afternoon  from  two 
until  sun  set."^  And  in  Philadelphia  in  1795,  an  unidentified  minia- 
turist placed  the  following  notice  in  the  Gazette  of  the  Lhiited  States. 
detailing  his  requirements  for  a  room: 

JOl'RN.AL    OF    EARI.V    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


Wanted,  On  or  before  the  first  of  December  next,  a  Furnished  Room,  on 
the  first  or  second  floor,  on  a  northern  or  western  view,  and  situated  be- 
tween Front  and  Fifth-streets,  and  betwixt  Walnut  and  Mulberry-streets, 
for  which  a  liberal  price  will  be  given.  The  furniture  required  are  only 
table  and  chairs,  and  chimney  apparatus,  as  it  is  intended  tor  miniature 
Painting  business.  Apply  to  the  Limner  at  No.  13,  north  Fourth  street.' 

While  much  is  known  about  the  peregrinations  of  artists  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  little  is  known  about  the  rooms  that  accommo- 
dated them."  A  painting  room,  called  a  studio  today,  had  special  re- 
quirements. A  central  location,  adequate  light,  and  reasonable  price 
were  probably  the  primary  considerations.  Although  an  itinerant 
artist  might  be  forced  to  stay  in  a  tavern  on  occasion,  taverns  were 
disruptive  and  noisy  at  the  best  of  times.  A  painter  with  sufficient  re- 
sources would  try  to  engage  a  room,  preferably  not  in  a  tavern.  The 
basic  necessities  for  a  painting  room  were  sufficient  daylight  to  work 
by,  a  bed  and  bedding,  two  chairs,  a  table,  cabinet  or  stool  to  hold 
art  supplies,  and  a  fireplace  or  small  stove  in  the  winter.  The  artist 
himself  would  have  brought  his  own  physiognotrace,  if  he  used  one, 
along  with  his  other  art  supplies.  An  oil  painter  may  well  have  car- 
ried a  disassembled  portable  easel  with  his  canvases.  A  miniature 
painter  carried  an  organized  little  case  containing  water  colors,  small 
brushes  (called  pencils  at  the  time),  a  stylus,  extra  ivories,  a  magnify- 
ing glass,  and  also  a  reducing  glass  to  scale  down  the  size  of  the  sitter. 
A  miniaturists  case  of  good  quality  opened  to  provide  a  small  ledge 
or  shelf  on  which  to  stand  the  ivory  or  card  while  the  miniaturist 
painted  on  it. 

The  more  successful  (or  ambitious)  artists  may  have  rented  two 
rooms.  James  Warrell  (lySo-pre-iSn).  a  painter  of  oil  portraits,  ad- 
vertised in  the  Virginia  Patriot  on  23  September  1812  that  "the  room 
he  paints  in  is  detached  from  the  one  he  has  placed  his  pictures  in," 
an  obvious  social  advantage  over  the  itinerant  artists  who  could  af- 
ford, or  locate,  only  one  room."  James  Guild  (1797-1841),  a  portrait 
and  miniature  painter  from  Vermont,  wrote  in  his  journal  during  a 
stay  in  Charleston,  South  Carolina,  in  1824  that  he  "rented  three 
rooms  in  an  Elegan  [sic]  house,  well  furnished  one  for  painting  and 

ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


another  to  receive  company  and  Exhibited  Some  ot  my  finest  Pro- 
duction at  the  Window.  ...  In  order  to  get  business  from  the  most 
wealthy  people  it  becomes  necessary  to  be  noticed  among  them."** 
He  was  a  canny  entrepreneur. 

A  newcomer  to  town  would  head  lor  a  tavern,  because  taverns 
served  as  clearinghouses  tor  information.  There  the  visitor  would 
easily  hear  of  suitable  accommodations,  if  any  were  available.  Al- 
though such  artists  might  be  competitors  today,  at  this  period  they 
were  often  helpful  to  each  other,  demonstrating  painting  techniques 
and  describing  sources  tor  art  supplies.  Undoubtedly  they  "net- 
worked"— comparing  the  best  methods  ot  travel,  opportunities  in 
other  cities  (or  the  lack  thereot)  and  desirable  painting  rooms  in  var- 
ious cities  and  towns.'  Artists"  newspaper  advertisements  trequently 
mention  that  they  are  occupying  rooms  just  vacated  by  another 
artist. 


ALEXANDRIA    AND    GUY    ATKINSON    S 
PAINTING     ROOMS 

In  Alexandria  between  1805  and  1820,  an  interesting  and  diverse 
group  ot  itinerant  artists  rented  painting  rooms  in  two  adjoining 
brick  buildings  (fig.  i)  on  Fairtax  Street,  between  King  and  Cameron 
streets,  which  were  owned  by  merchant  Guy  Atkinson."  Ot  the 
rwenty-rwo  artists  known  to  have  visited  the  city  between  1805  and 
1820,  one  third  advertised  that  they  could  be  found  on  Fairfax 
Street." 

A  lively  seaport  town  tounded  in  1749  and  incorporated  in  1779, 
Alexandria  was  built  on  commerce.  Its  prime  advantage  was  its  ex- 
cellent port;  the  most  important  early  exports  were  tobacco,  wheat, 
flour,  and  lumber  products.  Technically  it  was  part  ot  the  District  of 
Columbia  trom  1790  until  1846,  when  it  reverted  to  Virginia.  Its 
business  included  three  ropewalks,  two  tanneries,  tour  distilleries, 
two  small  spinning  mills,  and  two  sugar  refineries.  Livestock,  animal 
hides  and  tallow,  whiskey,  iron,  and  fish  were  also  exported  trom  this 


JOLIRNAL    OF    KARI.V    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


I.  Guy  Atkinson's  two  buildings  at  ns,  ii^  N.  Fairfax  Street,  Alexandria. 
Virginia,  built  c.  ij^d-iygj.  Courtesy  of  the  Cox  eolleetwu,  Lloyd  House  Li- 
brary of  Virginia  History  and  Genealogy,  Alexandria. 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


thriving  port.  By  1820,  six  banks  were  in  operation  in  the  town.'- 
Among  the  town's  cultural  attractions  were  seven  churches,  a  small 
academy,  one  free  school,  two  female  academies,  ten  private  schools, 
two  Masonic  lodges,  and  a  small  museum.  The  townspeople  were 
largely  middle-class  exporters,  importers,  merchants,  tradesmen,  me- 
chanics, and  planters." 

Fairfax  St.  provided  an  ideal  location  in  the  heart  ol  town,  as  it 
was  very  near  Market  House  and  Market  Square,  the  fish  market, 
the  Masonic  lodge,  the  town  hall,  the  apothecary,  the  Bank  ot  Alex- 
andria, the  C.  A.  Shutz  circulating  library,  many  taverns,  the  water- 
front, wharves,  and  the  public  baths." 

Guy  Atkinson  was  active  in  Alexandria  business,  political,  and 
charitable  circles.  A  younger  son  from  Kings  County  (now  County 
Offaly),  Ireland,  he  had  worked  as  a  shipping  clerk  to  Colonel  John 
Fitzgerald  of  Alexandria  and  later  made  several  voyages  to  Spanish 
ports  in  the  capacity  of  supercargo  for  Fitzgerald."  As  early  as  1786 
he  was  witnessing  land  transactions  in  Alexandria;  he  soon  became  a 
respected  wine  merchant  and  grocer  and  an  active,  responsible  citi- 
zen of  the  developing  town.  He  was  a  Council  member,  vestryman 
of  Christ  Church,  a  member  of  the  Hibernian  Society,  and  a 
Freemason."'  On  7  April  1803  Atkinson  married  Albina  Birch,  a 
daughter  of  the  noted  Philadelphia  artist  William  Russell  Birch 
(1755-1834),  at  the  Presbvterian  Meeting  House  in  Alexandria.'  The 
Masonic  historian  F.  L.  Brockett,  in  his  short  biographical  sketch  of 
Atkinson,  notes  that  Atkinson  was  present  at  the  funeral  oi  George 
Washington  and  also  at  the  Masonic  banquet  held  in  Alexandria  in 
honor  of  the  Marquis  de  Lafayette  in  1825."  Guy  Atkinson  died  at 
the  age  of  sevenrv'-seven  on  21  May  183s,  leaving  three  sons  and  two 
daughters.  His  wife  Albina  had  died  in  1818  at  the  age  of  thiru'-one. 
They  are  buried  at  Christ  Church  Episcopal  Wilkes  Street  Ceme- 
tery.'"' 

Atkinson  had  bought  property  in  Alexandria,  lots  41  and  42,  in 
October  1794  and  had  built,  about  1796-97,  the  two  brick  buildings 
of  three  stories  each  that  stand  on  Fairfax  Street  todav.  He  insured 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I  9  9  f^ 


his  various  buildings  with  Mutual  Assurance  Society  of  Virginia  in 
1796  and  1797,  and  reinsured  tor  higher  valuations  in  1805.'"  From 
these  two  buildings,  Atkinson  rented  out  rooms  to  artists  and  other 
itinerants,  including  at  least  one  dentist,  a  Dr.  R.  Darrah  "at  his  old 
stand  at  Mr.  Atkinson's  house.'"' 

Atkinson  himself  has  been  erroneously  called  a  portrait  artist  and 
gallery  proprietor.  This  is  based  on  a  misinterpretation  of  a  notice  in 
the  4  October  1811  Daily  Gazette  (Alexandria)  that  states,  "The  Por- 
trait and  Miniature  Painting  Room  at  Mr.  Guy  Atkinson's,  on  Fair- 
fax street,  is  now  open."'-  Although  his  name  appeared  frequently  in 
connection  with  itinerant  painters  in  Alexandria,  there  is  no  docu- 
mentation anywhere  that  Atkinson  himself  was  an  artist — he  was  a 
landlord  and  merchant.  The  Portrait  and  Miniature  Painting  Room, 
which  is  discussed  in  more  detail  below,  was  operated  by  two  or 
more  itinerant  artists  and  was  first  located  at  Atkinson's  in  one  or 
two  of  the  rooms  of  the  buildings  on  Fairfax  Street.  Atkinson  simply 
rented  out  the  rooms,  a  conclusion  supported  by  the  fact  that  the 
Painting  Room  moved  to  Prince  Street  within  a  month. 

Although  we  cannot  know  how  Atkinson's  rooms  were  furnished, 
their  popularity  suggests  that  they  were  appropriately  equipped.  Pos- 
sibly he  kept  an  easel  at  hand!  It  was  most  probably  a  pleasant  situa- 
tion, due  to  Albina  Birch  Atkinson's  upbringing  in  the  artistic 
household  of  her  father,  William  R.  Birch,  in  Philadelphia,  and  to 
Guy  Atkinson's  cosmopolitan  background  and  hospitable  nature,  as 
described  in  his  obituary. 

Atkinson's  two  buildings  on  Fairfax  Street  face  west,  thereby  giv- 
ing good  natural  light  late  in  the  day.  Possibly  the  rooms  rented  out 
were  on  the  north  side  of  the  house  nearest  Cameron  Street  (115 
North  Fairfax  Street  today).  North  light  has  been  preferred  by  many 
artists;  it  is  noteworthy  that  the  unidentified  miniaturist  who  adver- 
tised for  a  Painting  Room  in  Philadelphia  in  1795  specified  a  "north- 
ern or  western  view."-'  The  front  windows  of  the  buildings  face  di- 
rectly onto  the  street,  providing  a  good  place  to  display  an  artist's 
"specimens"  or  samples  of  his  painting  skill. 


ITINERANT   ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


THE    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET 

Of  the  more  than  thirty  itinerant  portrait  artists  who  advertised 
in  the  Alexandria  newspapers  between  1784  and  1820,  this  brief 
study  will  tocus  on  those  who  are  documented  as  having  lodged  on 
Fairfix  Street  between  1805  and  1820: 

•  William  Russell  Birch  (1755-1834),  miniaturist,  enamelist,  and 
engraver  oi  Philadelphia;  in  Alexandria  from  September  into  Octo- 
ber 1805. 

•  Cephas  Thompson  (1775-1856),  oil  portrait  painter  from  Massa- 
chusetts, December  1807  to  spring  1808;  visited  again  in  May  1809, 
remaining  into  the  summer. 

•  John  Bell  (active  1808-1816)  and  his  son  Thomas  Charles  Bell 
(active  1810-1831),  profilists,  portrait  and  miniature  painters,  and 
teachers  of  drawing  and  painting  from  Baltimore;  in  Alexandria 
from  mid-March  to  mid-August  1808.  T.  C.  Bell  advertised  profiles 
in  January  1809,  perhaps  on  a  return  visit. 

•  Mr.  Cromwell  (active  1808-1811),  miniature  painter,  profilist, 
and  oil  and  crayon  portraitist  from  London;  in  Alexandria  tor  about 
a  month  in  late  June  into  July  1809. 

•  Nicholas  Vincent  Boudet  (active  1793-1820),  French-born  oil 
portrait,  miniature,  and  historical  painter  from  Baltimore;  in  Alex- 
andria irom  mid-September  1811  to  June  1812. 

•  Louis  Pise  (1762-1822),  Italian-born  miniature  and  oil  portrait 
painter  and  drawing  master,  hom  Baltimore;  in  Alexandria  from 
June  1810  to  July  1812. 

•  Cornelius  Schroeder  (active  1804-1831),  miniature  painter  trom 
New  York;  in  Alexandria  for  two  or  three  months  from  November 
1816,  returning  in  August  1818  for  about  a  month. 

•  James  Manning  Leonard  (1792-1847),  oil  portrait  painter  from 
Massachusetts;  in  Alexandria  from  late  November  1818  to  January 
1819. 

There  is  a  tradition  in  Alexandria  that  Charles  Balthazar  Julien 
Fevret  de  Saint-Memin  (1770-1852)  had  a  painting  room  at  one  ot 


JOURNAL    OF    E.\RLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


Atkinson's  buildings  for  three  months  in  the  spring  of  1805.  In  her 
definitive  study  of  Saint-Memin,  Ellen  Miles  states,  "Saint-Memin's 
sitters  included  about  twenty-five  residents  of  Alexandria,  Virginia. 
The  artist  may  have  temporarily  moved  his  studio  there,  as  some 
sources  suggest,  but  no  documentation  for  this  has  been  found. "^' 

William  Russell  Birch 

One  o{  the  earliest  artists  to  refer  to  Guy  Atkinson  in  a  newspaper 
notice  was  the  well-known  Philadelphia  artist  William  Russell  Birch, 
whose  daughter  Albina  had  married  Atkinson  in  1803.  Birch  wrote 
about  his  1805  visit  in  his  unpublished  autobiography:  "I  returned  to 
Alexandra  [sic]  spent  a  few  days  with  my  son-in-law  Mr.  Guy  Atkin- 
son and  their  family,  who  were  very  happyly  situated.  "^"  Birch  adver- 
tised his  presence  in  Alexandria  in  the  Daily  Advertiser,  11  September 
1805. 

William  Birch  was  undoubtedly  one  of  the  most  notable  and  ac- 
complished artists  to  visit  Alexandria  during  the  first  two  decades  of 
the  nineteenth  century.  Born  and  trained  in  England,  he  had  exhib- 
ited successfully  in  London  as  early  as  1775  and  exhibited  his  minia- 
tures at  the  Royal  Academy.  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds  had  employed  him 
to  make  miniature  copies  in  enamel  of  Reynolds's  own  oil  portraits. 
In  spite  of  his  success  in  London,  Birch  came  to  Philadelphia  in  1794 
with  a  letter  of  introduction  from  Benjamin  West.  He  soon  built  a 
furnace  to  fire  his  enamels.^"  In  1800  he  published  with  his  son 
Thomas  (1779-1851)  a  series  of  engraved  Vieivs  of  Philadelphia,  fol- 
lowed in  1808-1809  by  Country  Seats  of  the  United  States.-' 

In  late  summer  of  1805,  Birch  had  set  out  southward  "with  a  gig 
and  a  little  black  mare  of  the  Canada  breed"'"  to  deliver  some 
Philadelphia  Views  engravings  already  subscribed,  and  to  obtain  ad- 
ditional subscriptions  for  Philadelphia  Vieivs  and  for  his  yet-to-be- 
published  Country  Seats.  He  also  hoped  for  commissions  for  por- 
traits. His  extended  trip  lasted  many  weeks  and  included  Washington 
City  and  Alexandria,  as  well  as  Baltimore,  Annapolis,  and  Easton, 
Maryland.  He  made  many  stops  along  the  way  with  friends  and  ac- 
quaintances to  whom  he  offered  professional  advice  on  improving 

ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


the  landscape  design  and  the  siting  {"situation")  ot  their  houses.  This 
was  a  period  of  great  interest  in  the  country  house  in  America,  and 
Birch's  native  abihry  in  planning  and  envisioning  a  house's  situation 
gave  him  a  solid  reputation  in  this  field."'  With  him  he  carried  speci- 
mens ot  his  work:  miniature  paintings  in  enamel  on  copper  and  wa- 
tercolor  on  ivory,  profile  portraits,  drawings,  and  engravings.'" 

Birch  was  noted  fiar  his  brilliant  enamels  with  a  high  sheen,  which 
were  unique  in  this  country.  He  seems  to  have  been  the  first  of  the 
very  few  artists  in  America  to  work  in  enamel,  a  difficult,  exacting, 
and  tedious  medium.  In  his  autobiography  he  states,  however,  "The 
art  of  enamel  painting  here  not  understood  or  encouragement 
enough  [?]  to  excell  [sic],  I  found  my  profession  dwindling  to  con- 
tempt."" In  enamel  on  copper  he  painted  portraits  (figs.  2  and  3), 
landscapes,  and  even  copies  ol  old  master  paintings  in  miniature; 
manv  of  his  enamels  were  mounted  in  pendants,  brooches,  bracelets 
and  snuffboxes. 

He  produced  about  sixty  enamel  portrait  miniatures  of  George 
Washington  after  Gilbert  Stuart,  and  also  portraits  of  Thomas  Jeffer- 
son after  Stuart,  Bishop  William  White  after  Thomas  Sully,  and  the 
Marquis  de  Lafayette  after  Ary  Scheffer.  His  life  portraits,  including 
those  of  Arthur  Lee,  Henry  Clay,  Samuel  Chase,  Daniel  Webster, 
Alexander  Hamilton,  Andrew  Jackson,  Robert  Gilmor,  other  noted 
people,  and  members  of  the  Birch  family,  and  his  own  self-portrait, 
have  a  striking  immediacy,  (fig.  4).'^ 

In  addition.  Birch  was  known  for  his  evocative  watercolors  of 
street  scenes  and  early  views  of  Philadelphia  and  the  Federal  City,  as 
well  as  his  watercolor  portrait  miniatures  and  the  richly  detailed  en- 
gravings. Even  William  Dunlap  (1766-1839),  often  envious  of  his 
artist  contemporaries,  commented  favorably  on  Birch's  miniature 
portrait  of  George  Washington  after  Stuart  and  added  that  "Birch 
could  design.""  He  rendered  an  unusual  varietv'  of  subject  matter: 
still  lifes,  an  engraving  of  The  Great  Fire  of  Londo)i  in  the  Year  1666,  a 
drawing  of  A  Dolphin  from  Nature,  enamels  of  simulated  cameo  and 
a  fanciful  Triumph  of  American  Independence,  and  an  engraving  of  A 
Saint  at  his  Devotion.'^ 

JOURNAL   OF    E.\RLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE   ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


2.  William  Russell  Birch,  General  John  Barker,  ijgo-iSio,  eintmel  on  copper, 
HOA  j  ",  WOA  2' J  "  (iiii)iiature  only).  Courtesy  of  the  Walters  Art  Gallery,  Balti- 
iiiore.  Gift  of  the  A.  J.  Fink  Foundation,  /p(5j,  accession  38.448.  Signed  lower 
right.  "WB.  " 

3.  William  Russell  Birch,  Mrs.  John  Barker,  ijgo-iSio,  enamel  on  copper,  HOA 
?",  WOA  2W  {miniature  only).  Courtesy  of  the  Walters  Art  Gallery,  Baltimore. 
Gift  of  the  A.  /.  Fink  Foundation,  1963,  accession  38.449.  Signed  lower  right, 
"WB.  " 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


4.  Willnwi  Russell  Birch,  Self-Portrait,  c. 
iSos,  watercolor  0)1  ivory,  HOA  2%",  W'OA  2" 
(immature  only).  Courtesy  of  the  Walters  Art 
Gallery,  Baltimore,  gift  of  A.  ].  Fink  Founda- 
tion, ig6},  accession  38.446.  Inscribed  on 
reverse,  "Louisa  S.  Birch  from  her  father,  Nov. 
24.  iS—" 


ludging  bv  his  Baltimore  advertisement  of  is  October  iSos,  Birch 
remained  in  Alexandria  only  three  to  tour  weeks.'  It  may  be  worth 
noting  that  three  years  later,  William  Birch's  son  George  Birch  (ac- 
tive 1807-1811),  a  Philadelphia  landscape  painter,  was  in  Alexandria 
for  about  nine  months  offering  his  fathers  engravings  again  for  sale, 
and  painting  "Profiles  in  the  neatest  style — also  cutting  them  at  his 
room  in  King-street,  four  doors  above  the  Indian  Queen;  where  he 
has  for  sale,  a  number  of  Prints — Views  of  Philadelphia,  Richmond, 
mount-Vernon,  &c."'"  He  offered  drawing  lessons  as  well.  For  the 
execution  of  a  fourteen-by-eleven-foot  emblematical  painting.  The 
Natii'ity  of  Waslnngtoii,  designed  b\'  the  step-grandson  of  President 
Wiishington,  George  Washington  Parke  Custis  (1781-1857),  for  dis- 
play at  a  public  ceremony  to  honor  President  Washington  in  Febru- 


JOl!RN.\L    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


ary  1809,  he  received  considerable  recognition  locally  and  in  the 
neighboring  cities  of  Fredericksburg  and  Baltimore/  George  Birch 
left  Alexandria  later  that  spring  and  was  commissioned  in  the  U.  S. 
Army  Light  Dragoons." 

Cephas  Thompson 

In  December  1807,  two  years  after  William  Birch's  visit,  the  Mid- 
dleboro,  Massachusetts,  oil-portrait  painter  Cephas  Thompson 
(1775— 1856)  stopped  in  Alexandria  on  one  of  his  painting  trips  to  the 
South,  remaining  at  least  through  February  1808.'"  Thompson  in- 
formed the  inhabitants  oi  Alexandria  that  he  had  "commenced  busi- 
ness in  the  house  adjoining  Mr.  Guy  Atkinsons,  Fairfax-street, 
where  some  SPECIMENS  may  be  seen."'"  We  returned  a  second  time 
in  May  1809,  again  staying  in  the  house  adjoining  Atkinsons."  ^ 

Thompson  kept  a  detailed  "Memorandum  of  Portraits"  (fig.  5),  oc 

which  has  survived;  it  includes  forrv'-nine  names  of  those  who  en-  ul 

> 


gaged  to  have  their  portraits  painted  during  the  winter  of  1807—8, 
and  about  twenty-seven  additional  names  in  1809,  suggesting  that  he 
may  have  painted  about  seventy-five  portraits  in  Alexandria.'-  The 
exact  number  is  uncertain  because  some  names  are  given  twice, 
some  are  crossed  out,  and  some  have  the  word  "copy"  or  "lor  my- 
self" added.  It  is  also  possible  that  not  all  were  oil  portraits — a  few 
may  have  been  the  less  expensive  painted  profiles.*'  Guy  Atkinson 
and  Mrs.  Atkinson  are  listed  on  the  first  page  of  the  Alexandria  sec- 
tion ol  the  Memorandum;  their  portraits  may  very  well  have  been 
painted  in  exchange  lor  rent,  but  unfortunately  their  location  is  un- 
known. 

Among  Thompsons  sitters  were  a  considerable  number  of 
Alexandria  merchants;  in  fact,  some  ol  the  names  in  the  Memoran- 
dum appear  to  be  the  actual  signatures  of  the  subjects.  A  substantial 
percentage  of  these  names  are  familiar  to  present-day  Alexandria  his- 
torians: Yeaton,  Lee,  Janney,  Moore,  Wise,  Fowle,  Hopkins,  Alexan- 
der, Slacum,  Triplett,  Dr.  Dick,  Gilman,  Fitzhugh,  Swan,  Carter, 
Humfries  and  Powell.  Among  the  local  figures  of  interest  is  Mar)' 
Fitzhugh  Custis  (1781-1857),  the  wile  of  George  Washington  Parke 

ITINER.ANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


i 


5.  Cephas  Thoinpsuiii  Mftnoniiidimi  of 
Pnrtniiti.  Recto  of  "A  Hit  of  namci  of  those  who 
Engage  there  [sic]  Portraits  in  Alexandria,  " 
1807— 1S08.  Courtesy  of  the  Boston  Athenaeiou, 
Mss.  L^o^.  vol.  D.  gift  ofALide/eine  Thoinpsaii 
Edmonds. 


Custis,  mentioned  earlier."  According  to  earlier 
sources,  Thompson  gave  Parke  Custis,  as  he  was 
called,  a  tew  painting  lessons/" 

During  the  winter  of  1807-1808,  Thompson 
painted  Gurden  Chapin  (1766— 1811)  and  his  wife 
Margaret  Reeder  Chapin  (m.  1793)  (figs.  6,  7). 
Thompson  was  largely  sell-taught  and  produced 
a  credible  likeness,  although  his  portraits  have  a 
static,  rather  passive  air;  he  was  kinder  to  the 
young  women  he  painted,  and  these  paintings 
have  an  appealing  charm,  as  shown  here. 

According  to  hmiilv  tradition  and  genealogies, 
Thompson  painted  portraits  in  the  southern 
states  during  the  winters  and  wisely  returned  to 
Massachusetts  for  the  summers."'  In  1804,  prior 
to  his  Alexandria  visit,  he  had  been  in  Baltimore 
and  Charleston,  as  well  as  Bristol,  Rhode  Island, 
in  1806-1807.  In  November  1809  Thompson 
traveled  to  Richmond,  Virginia;  he  had  great 
success  painting  there  and  in  Norfolk,  Virginia, 
into  the  winter  of  1812.  His  Memorandum  and 
newspaper  advertisements  indicate  painting  trips 
to  New  Orleans  Irom  December  1815  to  January 
1816;  Bristol,  Rhode  Island,  later  in  1816;  Savan- 
nah in  1817-1818,  Charleston  in  1818-1819  and 
again  in  1822,  his  last  southern  trip.^  The  South 
Carolina  Academy  of  Fine  Arts  in  Charleston  ex- 
hibited three  oils  by  Thompson  in  1823:  Portrait 
of  an  Old  Man  Aged  104,  Portrait  of  a  Gentleman, 
and  Skull  and  Bones f  He  exhibited  again  in  1828 
and  1830  at  the  Boston  Athenaeum.'"  Of  his  eight  children,  three  be- 
came successful  artists:  Marietta  Tintoretta  (1803-1892),  a  painter  of 
portrait  miniatures;  Cephas  Giovanni  (1809-1888),  a  portrait  and 
genre  painter;  and  Jerome  B.  (1814-1886),  a  portrait,  landscape,  and 
genre  painter.  " 


JOlIRN.\L   OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE   ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


6.  Cephas  Thompson,  Gurden  Chapin,  iSo'-iSoS.  oil  on  cdiivas.  HuA  2^' s", 
\%'0A  zz'/s".  Courtesy  of  the  Lyceum  Collection,  Alexandria,  Virginia,  gift  of 
giana  Chapin  Warren.  LYic/86.^.i. 


7.  Cephas  Thompson,  Margaret  Reeder  Chapin  (Mrs.  Gurden  Chapin),  i8o~- 
1808,  oil  on  canvas,  HOA  2^",  W'OA  22".  Courtesy  of  the  Lyceum  Collection, 
Alexandria,  Virginia,  gift  of  Georgiana  Chapin  Warren.  L)'ig86.^.2. 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


Two  names  of  special  inrerest  that  might  escape  notice  in  Cephas 
Thompsons  Memorandum  are  Arad  Thompson  and  John  Bell,  both 
in  the  1807-1808  Alexandria  section.  Arad  Thompson  (1786-1843), 
the  younger  brother  oi  Cephas,  advertised  his  proposed  Water  Street 
Academy  on  28  December  1807.  He  planned  to  teach  "Reading, 
Writing,  English  Grammar,  Mathematics,  the  Latin  and  Greek  Lan- 
guages, Geography,  etc.""  As  there  were  many  notices  tor  competing 
teachers  and  schools  of  all  kinds,  it  is  unlikely  that  this  venture  suc- 
ceeded. Arad  Thompson  studied  medicine  at  Dartmouth  College 
and  ultimately  became  a  physician  in  Middleboro,  Massachusetts. - 
The  Thompson  brothers  may  well  have  arrived  in  Alexandria  to- 
gether, Arad  to  teach  and  Cephas  to  paint  portraits.  Although  Arad 
Thompson  is  said  to  also  have  painteci  portraits,  none  have  been 
identified.' 

John  Bell 

The  appearance  of  lohn  C.  Bell's  name  in  Cephas  Thompsons 
Memorandum  helps  to  flesh  out  the  interwoven  careers  and  lives  of 
itinerant  artists  of  the  time.  Bell  was  a  Baltimore  portrait  and  land- 
scape painter,  known  by  his  14  March  1808  advertisement  to  have 
been  in  Alexandria,  and  it  is  instructive  to  note  that  he  commis- 
sioned a  portrait  ol  himsell"  during  the  winter  of  1808.'"  It  is  highly 
probable  that  Bell  wished  to  study  Thompson's  oil  painting  tech- 
nique by  watching  him  paint  Bell's  own  portrait.  American  non-aca- 
demic artists  and  craftsmen  typically  learned  their  skills  from  some- 
one more  experienced  who  was  willing  to  do  a  little  coaching,  and 
Thompson  was  certainly  a  more  competent  painter  than  Bell.  Bell's 
painted  profile  style,  seen  in  figures  8  and  9,  conveys  a  good  likeness, 
characterized  by  some  modeling  and  his  distinctive  curved  lower 
edge  that  set  off  the  profile  well." 

John  Bell  had  a  son,  Thomas  Charles  Bell  (ac.  1810-1831),  who 
worked  with  him  in  Alexandria.  Fheir  first  advertisement  reads: 
"Fine  Arts  /  I.  Bell  and  Son,  Teachers  of  Drawing  &  Painting,  Ambi- 
tious to  obtain  the  patronage  .  .  .  have  taken  a  room  in  Fairfax  street, 


JOURN.AL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


8.  Attributed  to  Jol.Di  Bell.  Portrait  o|-  a  iMan,  c.  iSi6,  iviitenolor  o)i  paper,  HOA 
4'/s",  \\"0A  j'/s".  Courtesy  of  the  Chrysler  Musettm  of  Art,  Norfolk,  Virginia, 
Moses  Myers  House.  The  Historic  Houses  are  the  property  of  the  City  of  Norfolk 
and  are  operated  by  the  Chrysler  Museum  of  Art.  .MSI.1.26S. 

9.  Attributed  to  John  Bell,  Portrait  of  a  Man,  c.  1816,  watercolor  on  paper, 
4"  X  y^/i6".  Courtesy  of  the  Chrysler  Museum  of  Art,  Noifolk,  Virginia,  Moses 
Myers  House.  The  Historic  Houses  are  the  property  of  the  City  of  Norfolk  and 
are  operated  by  the  Chrysler  Museum  of  Art.  .\lsi. 1.267. 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


opposite  ro  Mr.  Gregg's,  silversmith."'" They  taught  the  use  of  "Indi- 
an Ink,  and  Water  Colors,  6  dollars  per  quarter — and  for  Oil  Col- 
ors, ten  dollars."' 

By  8  August  1808  John  Bell  offered  what  he  described  as  an  "Un- 
heard of  Accommodation" — as  indeed  it  was,  at  least  for  Alexandria. 


Unheard  of  Accommodation. 

JOHN    BELL, 
Drawing  and  Painting  Master 

Is  now  raising  a  club,  to  supply  individuals  with  their  Portraits  on 
easv  terms:  it  will  consist  of  twenry'-tour  persons,  each  to  deposit 
two  dollars,  weekly,  and  at  the  expiration  ot  twelve  weeks,  each  per- 
son shall  receive  a  well  finished  and  approved  Likeness,  large  as  life. 

Two  individuals  will  sit  for  their  pictures  every  week,  as  their  names 
are  inserted  in  the  list. 

Specimens  to  be  seen  at  his  house,  near  captain  Slacum's,  lower  end 
of  Fairfax  street.'" 


This  appears  to  have  been  an  original,  unique  way  to  provide  lor 
day-to-day  living  expenses.  Twenty-four  persons  times  twenty-four 
dollars  each  would  have  resulted  in  a  small  fortune  for  Bell,  $576! 
Whether  it  captured  the  imagination  of  Alexandrians,  however,  is 
hard  to  say. 

Mr.  Cromwell 

Although  some  one-hundred-eighty  years  have  passed,  Irom  the 
printed  newspaper  notices  it  is  still  possible  to  catch  the  distinctive 
personalities  of  some  ol  the  more  quirky,  less  staid  itinerant  artists. 
The  optimist  entrepreneur  John  Bell  was  one;  another  was  a  Mr. 
Cromwell  who  arrived  on  Fairfax  Street  a  year  later,  in  1809,  offering 
to  teach  "Broad  Sword  Exercise,  The  Whole  Six  Divisions  ...  of- 
fence and  defence"  as  well  as  to  cut  profiles  and  paint  portraits."' 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOIITHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


Cromwell  had  been  in  Quebec 
from  early  August  1808  into  January 
1809,  a  successful  five-month  stay, 
advertising  "Profile  Likenesses,  Four 
for  Fifteen  Pence:  With  a  new 
Patent  Physiognotrace  .  .  .  Portraits 
taken  in  Oil,  Crayons,  and  Water 
Colours — Profiles  superbly  Enam- 
elled on  Glass,  Painted  and  Shaded 
ditto."  In  Canada  he  also  claimed  to 
have  been  a  "Pupil  oi  the  celebrated 
Artist  (Sir)  Benjamin  West."""  The 
Canadian  art  historian  J.  Russell 
Harper  notes  that  Cromwell  "paint- 
ed pictures  tor  the  churches"  and 
also  that  he  "gave  evening  readings 
and  recitations,  and  acted  in  the  lo- 
cal theatrical  company.""'  The  strik- 
ing halt-length  Canadian  portrait  in 
figure  10  is  attributed  to  Cromwell. 

We  have  less  detailed  documenta- 
tion for  Cromwell's  Alexandria  visit, 
since  he  remained  only  about  one 
month.  Perhaps  there  was  not  much 
call  tor  the  broad  sword;  it  is  not 
mentioned  in  Cromwell's  later  1809 
advertisements  in  Annapolis,  East- 
on,  and  Baltimore,  where  he  offered 
framing  of  profiles,  prints,  paintings 
and   drawings,    a    more   customary 

sideline  for  an  artist."  In  Baltimore  Cromwell  advertised  only  twice, 
on  24  and  27  January  1810.  Baltimore,  as  well  as  Philadelphia  and 
Charleston,  was  an  important  artistic  center  at  this  time,  and 
Cromwell  must  have  met  considerable  competition;  at  least  eight 


10.  Attributed  to  Cro7nwell.  Miniature  Portrait  ot  Colonel 
Michel-Louis  Juchereau-Duchesnay,  c.  1S08,  gouache  and 
watercolor  on  ivory,  HOA  4%,  WOA  j'A  ".  AlcCord Mt/semn 
of  Canadian  History,  Montreal. 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


portrait  artists  were  known  to  have  been  in  Baltimore  in  1810."'  By 
the  end  of  December,  Cromwell  was  in  Charleston,  where  he  adver- 
tised through  July  1811,  describing  his  work  in  great  detail."'  Accord- 
ing to  Anna  Wells  Rutledge,  his  only  competitor  at  the  time  was 
probably  John  Rubens  Smith  (1775-1849),  if  indeed  Cromwell  was 
still  in  Charleston  by  November  1811.'  No  later  mention  of 
Cromwell  is  known. 


THE     PORTRAIT    AND    MINIATURE     PAINTING     ROOM 

Two  years  after  Cromwell's  1809  visit  to  Alexandria,  a  new  artistic 
venture  was  announced  in  the  press  by  a  small  notice  in  mid-Sep- 
tember 1811,  which  was  followed  bv  a  larger  notice  on  4  October 
1811: 


NOTICE. 

THE  Portrait  and  Miniature  Painting  Room  at  Mr.  Guy  Atkinson's, 
on  Fairfax  street,  is  now  open  for  the  reception  of  Setters  every  day 
in  the  week,  between  the  hours  of  ten  and  two,  excepting  Satur- 
days, which  are  entirely  dedicated  to  the  Admirers  of  Liberal  Arts, 
whom  the  Artists  particularly  invite  to  the  above  place;  where  the 
likenesses  of  several  persons  taken  here  are  to  be  seen. 

Price  of  Likenesses  are  as  follows,  viz. 

For  Portraits  in  Bust,  60  dollars. 
For  half  size  Portrait,  30  dollars. 
For  Miniature,  25  dollars.'"' 


As  has  been  discussed  above,  the  mention  of  Guy  Atkinson's 
name  in  this  notice  has  been  interpreted  to  mean  that  Atkinson  was 
the  artist  and  gallery  proprietor;  however,  from  the  pattern  of  several 
artists'  renting  Atkinson's  rooms,  it  becomes  clear  that  he  was  simpiv 
the  landlord.  On  12  October  1811,  the  Portrait  and  N4iniature  Paint- 
ing Room  announced  its  first  move,  from  one  of  Atkinson's  build- 


JOt'RNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


ings  on  Fairfax  Street  to  Prince  Street;  in  April  1812  it  moved  to 
Washington  Street;  finally,  on  18  June  1812  it  moved  back  to  Prince 
Street.  This  was  the  Painting  Room's  last  mention  in  the  local  press 
and  the  sole  notice  that  included  the  name  ot  an  artist — Nicholas 
Vincent  Boudet." 

There  are  three  points  to  be  noted  about  the  4  October  1811  ad- 
vertisement. First  ol"  all,  more  than  one  artist  was  involved  in  the 
Painting  Room;  second,  the  unidentified  portraitists  had  been  in 
town  long  enough  to  have  made  likenesses  oi  several  local  people  to 
display  as  specimens  of  their  work;  third,  the  prices  quoted  are 
somewhat  higher  than  one  might  expect  in  Alexandria  in  1811. 

Who  were  the  portrait  artists  who  placed  this  notice?  At  present 
the  only  clues  are  the  newspapers,  telling  us  who  was  in  Alexandria 
between  September  1811  and  June  1812.  MESDA's  I?i(/ex  of  Early 
Southern  Artists  iind  Artisans  and  the  research  facilities  at  Lloyd 
Fiouse,  the  Library  of  Virginia  F^istory  &  Genealogy  in  Alexandria, 
record  two  such  artists:  Nicholas  Vincent  Boudet  (ac.  1793-1820) 
and  Louis  A.  Pise  (1762-1822),  both  Baltimore  artists  and  both 
French-speaking  according  to  their  advertisements,  although  Pise 
was  actually  Italian-born  and  trainee!. 

Competition  among  artists  was  fierce  in  Baltimore.  Boudet  and 
Pise,  who  may  have  been  well  acquainted  in  that  city,  were  probably 
"testing  the  waters"  in  Alexandria,  which,  like  almost  every  Ameri- 
can coastal  city,  had  a  small  French  emigre  community.  The  use  ol 
Boudet's  name  in  the  18  June  1812  notice  strongly  suggests  that  he 
was  a  leading  figure  in  the  Portrait  and  Miniature  Painting  Room  of 
1811-1812;  it  is  very  likely  that  Louis  Pise  was  involved  as  well.  Other 
artists  whose  names  have  not  yet  surfaced  may  also  have  participated 
for  a  few  weeks  or  months. 

By  the  time  ol  the  last  newspaper  mention  ol  the  Portrait  and 
Miniature  Painting  Room  on  18  June  1812,  it  had  been  in  operation 
about  ten  months;  after  that  time,  it  appears  that  the  artists  drifted 
away.  An  ever-present  problem  for  portraitists,  even  if  successful  lor 
a  time,  was  that  they  tended  to  work  themselves  out  of  commissions, 
especially  in  the  smaller  cities  and  towns. 

ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


Louis  Pise 

The  name  of  Louis  (Lewis)  A.  Pise  (1792— 1822)  is  an  obscure  one, 
in  part  because  no  drawings,  miniatures,  oil  portraits  or  landscapes 
have  been  identified  as  his,  although  he  worked  in  the  Chesapeake 
region  lor  two  decades.  Furthermore,  his  name  has  often  been  mis- 
spelled as  Peis,  Pease,  Pese,  Pite,  and  Pile  (inaccurate  transcription  ol 
the  letter  5-"" 

Pise  first  advertised  in  Philadelphia  as  a  miniature  painter  Irom 
1795  to  1798,  but  soon  moved  to  Baltimore,  listing  himself  in  1799- 
1801  as  a  miniature  painter  and  drawing  teacher,  "Disciple  of  the 
Royal  Academy  of  Painting  of  Torino.""'  He  spent  the  next  five  years 
in  Annapolis,  where  his  son,  the  clerg)'man  and  poet  Charles  Con- 
stantine  Pise  (1802-1866),  was  born.  "  In  1806  he  re-established  him- 
self in  Baltimore,  which  became  his  home  except  lor  painting  trips 
to  Alexandria  in  1810— 1812,  to  Georgetown  later  in  1812,  and  to  East- 
on,  Maryland,  in  1819.  '  In  Baltimore  Pise  taught  at  the  academies  of 
Madame  LaCombe  and  Mr.  Samuel  Brown  and  at  Baltimore  Col- 
lege, working  in  several  media — chalk,  watercolor,  and  oils.  He  also 
taught  French  at  these  establishments,  as  well  as  in  other  towns.  ■ 
In  Annapolis  and  Baltimore  he  also  offered  to  paint  "mourning 
devises."  '  Mourning  devices  or  mourning  miniatures  were  small 
paintings  in  watercolor  on  i\ory,  containing  classical  symbols  of  sor- 
row, such  as  a  gravestone,  an  urn,  a  weeping  willow,  often  combined 
with  grieving  figures.  Mourning  miniatures  were  worn  as  lockets, 
brooches,  bracelets,  or  rings,  and  are  usually  unsigned. 

In  Alexandria,  Pise  first  advertised  on  12  June  1810  as  a  "Painter 
and  Drawing  Master,"  and  followed  this  with  similar  notices  on  25 
May  and  23  July  1811,  probably  remaining  until  early  summer  1812, 
about  the  time  the  Portrait  and  Miniature  Painting  Room  disband- 
ed. By  2  July  1812  he  had  relocated  to  Georgetown,  and  by  1815  re- 
turned to  Baltimore.  '  In  1822  Louis  Pise,  age  Go,  and  three  of  his 
young  children  died  in  Baltimore,  most  probabK'  from  a  highly  con- 
tagious disease. 

In  his  notices.  Pise  stressed  his  moderate  prices:  "Likenesses  in  oil 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


for  Fifteen  Dollars — Paintings,  as  landscapes  and  other  subjects  may 
be  had  on  moderate  terms."  He  may  have  been  trying  to  obtain 
more  custom  from  middle-class  patrons;  in  1799  in  Baltimore,  he 
had  even  offered  to  take  goods  in  payment.'' The  fact  that  he  em- 
phasized teaching,  a  more  dependable  source  of  income,  in  his  ad- 
vertisements does  not  rule  out  his  painting  the  occasional  miniature, 
oil  portrait  or  landscape,  nor  his  likely  participation  in  the  Portrait 
and  Miniature  Painting  Room. 

Nicholas  Boudet 

Nicholas  Vincent  Boudet  (ac.  1793-1820)  was  an  unusual  artist — 
very  French,  very  much  of  his  time,  and  very  voluble.  He  believed  in 
advertising,  and  his  notices  make  interesting  reading.  A  refugee  with 
his  family  from  the  political  turmoil  in  France,  he  arrived  in 
Philadelphia  between  1791  and  1793.  At  first  he  specialized  in  por- 
trait and  miniature  painting,  and  his  son  Dominic  William  Boudet 
(ac.  1801-1845)  taught  dancing  and  the  French  language.  In  1801- 
1802  father  and  son  were  in  Savannah,  Georgia,  and  Charleston, 
South  Carolina,  then  Richmond  and  Norfolk,  Virginia,  and  from 
1806-1810  they  offered  "Likenesses  in  the  Academical  Style"  in  Balti- 
more. ■* 

However  on  10  August  1810,  Boudet  printed  this  testy  notice  in 
the  National  Intelligencer,  Washington  City: 


Mr.  Boudet,  Historical,  Portrait  and  Miniature  Painter, 

from  the  Academy  of  Paris, 

"Respectflilly  .  .  .  has  opened  a  Painting  Room  on  the  Capitol  Hill, 
where  he  offers  his  professional  services,  and  at  the  same  time  informs 
them  that  in  consequence  of  his  not  wishing  to  have  his  paintings  tak- 
en for  those  of  Mr.  Boudon's,  and  Mr.  Boudon's  for  his,  he  acquaints 
them  that  Mr.  Boudet  is  not  Mr.  Boudon,  and  Mr.  Boudon  is  not  Mr. 
Boudet."  " 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


Their  style  was  nor  ar  all  similar;  David  Boudon,  (ac.  1794-1816)  a 
French-speaking  Swiss  emigre,  execured  sensitive  portraits  usually  in 
silverpoint  on  vellum." 

By  3  October  1810  in  Baltimore,  Nicholas  Boudet  placed  an  ex- 
travagantly worded  notice  that  began:  "Imitation  of  Nature  In  the 
Style  Rare  in  Europe,  and  Novel  in  America — or  Portraits  ol  All 
Sizes,  Painted  in  the  most  graceful  style,  not  only  on  Canvass  and 
Ivory,  but  on  and  Silver  Gold"  [sic].  "  The  notice,  which  is  too  long 
to  quote  here,  appears  to  contain  a  note  ot  desperation  reflecting  his 
precarious  finances. 

On  7  August  1811,  Nicholas  Boudet  and  his  son  inserted  a  notice 
in  a  Baltimore  newspaper  referring  more  directly  to  their  financial 
difficulties:  "N.  Boudet  &  Son  hereby  give  notice  to  those  to  whom 
they  are  indebted,  as  well  as  those  who  are  indebted  to  them,  that 
lor  the  better  arrangement  ol  their  business  in  Baltimore,  they  have 
fixed  upon  the  ist  ol  January,  1812,  for  the  adjustment  of  all  unset- 
tled accounts  ot  the  firm."'-  Significantly,  this  notice  was  printed 
shortly  before  the  Alexandria  Portrait  and  Miniature  Painting  Room 
opened  for  business  in  mid-September  1811.  Boudet  may  well  have 
felt  that  he  would  fare  better  in  Alexandria  than  in  Baltimore. 

Nicholas  Boudet's  location  in  June  1812  is  puzzling.  He  placed  one 
newspaper  notice,  mentioned  above,  in  Alexandria  on  18  June  1812, 
while  two  days  earlier,  on  16  June,  a  notice  appeared  in  the  Natio)ial 
Intelligencer  \n  Washington  Ciry,  saying  "MR.  BOUDET,  penetrated 
with  the  most  lively  sentiments  of  gratitude  .  .  .  happy  to  gi\'e  notice 
that  his  Painting  Room  will  be  open  on  Capital  Hill  .  .  .  in\ites  con- 
noisseurs and  the  admirers  of  the  liberal  arts  to  visit.""'  This  sounds 
like  Nicholas  Boudet's  phrasing.  Was  he  simultaneously  painting  in 
Alexandria  and  Washington  City?  Or,  because  Nicholas  and  his  son, 
Dominic  William,  so  often  worked  together  as  partners,  was  one 
man,  perhaps  Dominic,  working  in  Washington  C\x\  and  the  other 
still  in  Alexandria?  In  any  case,  after  four  months  in  Wishington 
Cit}',  father  and  son  headed  to  Fredericksburg,  V^irginia." 

In  1813  Nicholas  Boudet  returned  briefly  to  Philadelphia,  where 
he  wrote  a  letter  of  several  pages  in  French  to  Stephen  Girard 
(1750-1831),  the  eminently  successful  shipping  merchant,  financier. 


24  JOl'RNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


and  banker,  importuning  Girard  for  money  Boudec  telt  was  owed 
him  For  having  designed  a  ship  tor  Girard  in  the  early  seventeen- 
nineties."'  There  is  no  record  that  Girard  responded  to  this  impas- 
sioned letter.  In  1794  Boudet  had  painted  a  lovely  portrait  ol  Sally 
Bickham  (fig.  11),  Girard's  housekeeper.  Significantly,  this  portrait  is 
signed  on  the  front,  lower  right,  on  a  small  square  oi  attached  paper, 
"Phil'  1794  by  /  N.  V.  Boudet  /  price  40  Dollars. "It  is  a  reverse  paint- 
ing, oil  on  glass,  a  medium  unmentioned  in  his  newspaper  advertise- 
ments. 

It  is  worth  noting  the  uncommonh'  high  prices  Boudet  set  tor  his 
work  in  Alexandria,  listed  in  the  4  October  1811  notice  for  the  Por- 
trait and  Miniature  Painting  Room.  He  gives  no  prices  in  newspa- 


11.  Nicholas  Boti/iet. 
Sally  Bickham,  l~94, 
revene  painting  on 
glass,  HO  A  2s'-i  ",  U'O.H 
20' '2".  Courtesy  of 
Stephen  Girard  Collec- 
tion, Girard  College, 
Philadelphia.  Inscribed 
on  paper  label,  lower 
right:  "Phtla.  1^94  by  I 
N.  \ '.  Boudet  /price  40 
Dollars.  " 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


pers  in  other  cities  for  comparison,  although  we  do  know  that  he 
put  a  value  of  $40  on  the  Sally  Bickham  portrait.  It  may  be  that  his 
prices  reflected  his  pressing  Baltimore  debts  combined  with  a  rather 
inflated  idea  of  his  own  worth,  an  attitude  probably  based  on  his 
privileged  French  background/" 

In  1818,  back  in  Baltimore,  Nicholas  Boudet  exhibited  his  large  oil 
painting,  the  Celebration  of  the  Memorable  Fourth  of  July,  at  the 
courthouse.  Dominic  Boudet  also  exhibited  his  large  Battle  of  North 
Point  and  other  historical  paintings.  Nicholas  and  Dominic  Boudet 
were  brought  to  debtor's  court  as  "insolvent  debtors"  in  February 
and  March  1820,  respectively.  The  son's  painting  career  continued 
until  1845;  however,  Nicholas  Boudet  drops  from  public  record  in 
1820/' 

Cornelius  Schroeder 

In  Alexandria  in  1816,  Cornelius  Schroeder  (ac.  1804-1831),  a 
somewhat  obscure  New  York  miniaturist  originally  from  Hanau, 
Germany,  advertised  that  he  had  taken  a  room  at  Mr.  Guy  Atkin- 
son's, where  he  would  paint  likenesses."''  His  known  miniatures,  in 
watercolor  on  ivory,  were  sold  for  $15.00. 

Schroeder's  travels  were  those  of  the  prototypical  itinerant  artist, 
ranging  from  the  Carolinas  in  1804  to  Montreal  in  1831."'  In  1806  he 
was  in  Halifax,  North  Carolina,  and  then  in  Raleigh,  North  Caroli- 
na, when  the  state  legislature  was  in  session;  in  1807-1808  he  was  in 
Savannah  and  Augusta,  Georgia,  where  he  advertised  "likenesses  in 
Lockets,  Breastpins,  etc. ";  in  1809  in  Augusta  and  Savannah  again; 
between  1811-1816  he  is  listed  in  New  York  city  directories;  after  his 
1816  Alexandria  sojourn,  planned  to  last  a  "few  weeks, "  as  his  11  No- 
vember 1816  advertisement  states,  he  returned  to  Savannah  in  1817; 
in  August  1818  he  returned  to  Alexandria,  to  work  "at  Mr.  Atkinson's 
as  heretofore. """  He  then  spent  October  through  December  1818  in 
Richmond,  after  which  the  autumn  of  1819  found  him  in  Quebec 
and  Montreal."  After  1820  until  1829,  he  is  again  listed  in  New  York 
City  directories,  but  in  1830-1831  he  is  in  Montreal  and  Quebec 
again.'-  An  unusual  event  in  Schroeder's  painting  career  occurred  in 


26  JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


i8i9  in  Montreal,  when  Schroeder  painted  a  portrait  of  Charles 
Lennox,  the  Fourth  Duke  oi  Richmond,  the  Governor-General, 
who  had  recently  died  of  rabies  from  a  fox-bite.  The  portrait  was  en- 
graved by  William  Leney  (1769-1831).'" 

Schroeder  had  considerable  success  in  the  American  South,  where 
a  number  ot  his  accomplished  portrait  miniatures  are  known  to  be 
in  private  collections  (see  figure  12).  Most  ohen  they  are  initialed 
"C.  S. '  in  paint,  but  at  least  two  have  been  recorded  that  were 
backed  with  a  card  bearing  his  name,  followed  by  "Portrait  and 
Miniature  Painter."'^ 


12.  Cornelius  Schroeder, 
Miniature  Portrait  of  an 
Unknown  Woman,  (-.  iSio, 
watercolor  on  ivory,  HOA 
2 'A  ",  WOA  iV-t  "  (miniature 
only).  Signed  lower  right: 
"C  S.  "  Private  collection. 
MRF  6,oop. 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


James  Matniiiig  Leonard 

The  last  artist  documented  to  have  rented  a  painting  room  from 
Guy  Atkinson  before  1820  was  James  Manning  Leonard  (179^- 
1847),  a  painter  of  oil  portraits  from  Middleboro,  Massachusetts, 
and  the  young  brother-in-law  of  Cephas  Thompson  (1775-1856), 
who  had  lodged  at  Atkinsons  in  1807-1808  and  in  1809.  Leonards 
older  sister  Olive  Leonard  (1780-1819)  had  married  Thompson  in 
1802.  "  The  progress  of  James  Manning  Leonard's  career,  though 
sketchy,  can  be  pieced  together  parth'  trom  newspaper  advertise- 
ments for  his  painting  itinerancy,  partly  from  information  contained 
in  Leonard  and  Thompson  genealogies  that  document  his  later  lite 
in  the  Midwest. 

lames  Manning  Leonard  began  to  advertise  as  a  portrait  painter 
in  1811,  at  the  age  of  nineteen,  in  New  Bedford,  Massachusetts,  after 
an  apprenticeship  with  Cephas  Thompson."  Thompson  had  had 
success  painting  portraits  in  the  South,  and  Leonard  headed  south  as 
well.  His  Yankee  reticence  showed  in  his  newspaper  notices;  conse- 
quently, thev  are  not  very  informative.  On  31  January  1816  he  adver- 
tised "Portrait  Painting"  in  Norfolk,  Virginia."^  The  following  De- 
cember, he  stated  in  Fredericksburg,  Virginia,  that  "a  specimen  of 
his  work"  could  be  seen  at  his  rooms;  however,  by  8  March  1817  he 
informed  the  inhabitants  that  he  had  "several  Portraits  of  Gentle- 
men, well  known  to  this  place"  as  specimens.  "  In  January  1818  he 
seems  either  to  have  made  a  repeat  visit  to  Fredericksburg  or  to  have 
remained  there  since  the  previous  March. "" 

Leonard  probably  returned  to  New  England  during  the  summers, 
as  did  Cephas  Thompson,  because  his  advertisements  appear  in  the 
winter  months.  At  the  end  of  November  1818  Leonard  first  adver- 
tised in  Alexandria  that  he  had  "taken  rooms  ...  in  Mr.  Guy  Atkin- 
sons building,  Fairfax  street,"  where  he  remained  well  into  January 
1819.  To  avoid  interruption  he  "alotted  to  visitors  from  11  a.m.  till  2 
P.M.  on  Tuesdays  and  Fridays."'"" 

About  1820  Leonard  was  painting  in  Jefferson  County,  Virginia 
(now  West  Virginia).'"  We  learn  from  family  sources  that  he  aban- 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


doned  portrait  painting  because  "the  lure  oi  the  West  and  the  suc- 
cess in  business  some  of  his  brothers  were  having  was  too  strong  for 
him."  By  1833  he  had  moved  to  Madison,  Indiana;  about  1834  he 
moved  to  Ottawa,  IlHnois,  where  he  was  engaged  in  the  mercantile 
and  milling  businesses.  He  died  there  in  1847." 

Very  tew  portraits  have  been  identified  as  the  work  of  James  Man- 
ning Leonard  or  attributed  to  him;  figure  13  shows  an  early  work, 
circa  1811,  from  Massachusetts.  An  early  self-portrait  from  a  private 
collection  is  quite  a  tour  de  force;  it  shows  the  young,  dark-haired 
artist  holding  a  palette  and  mahl  stick  in  his  left  hand  and  a  brush  in 


13.  James  Manning  Leonard, 
David  Delano,  c.  1811,  oil  on 
canvas,  HOA  24  ",  WOA  ij'/i " 
(not  including  frame).  Old 
Dartmouth  Historical  Society, 
New  Bedford,  Mass.  Courtesy  of 
New  Bedford  Whaling  Museum, 
gift  of  Sarah  T.  Hammond,  ac- 
cession 24.'). 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


i9 


his  right,  seated  in  front  oi  a  canvas  showing  another  self-portrait.  It 
is  regrettable  that  James  Manning  Leonard  abandoned  portrait 
painting.  Unrecorded  portraits  by  James  M.  Leonard  may  well  be 
found  in  Norfolk,  Fredericksburg,  and  Alexandria,  Virginia,  as  well 
as  elsewhere  in  the  South  where  Leonard  traveled. 

The  itinerant  artists  described  in  this  article  are  representative, 
even  typical,  of  the  hundreds  of  itinerant  artists  who  traveled  the 
eastern  seaboard  from  Savannah  to  Quebec  after  the  Revolution  and 
before  the  invention  of  the  daguerreotype  in  1839.  It  was  not  an  easy 
life;  some  young  artists  were  itinerants  only  until  they  became 
known  and  could  establish  themselves  somewhere.  Others  did  seem 
to  prefer  the  life  of  a  wanderer.  A  number  of  itinerant  painters  be- 
came well  known,  including  Ralph  Earl  (1751-1801),  Charles  Loring 
Elliott  (1812-1868),  William  Dunlap,  Samuel  E  B.  Morse  (1791- 
1872),  John  Wesley  Jarvis  (1780-1840),  and  Chester  Harding  (1792- 
1866).'"' 

Neil  Harris  pointed  out  in  The  Artist  in  Ajiieriatfi  Society:  the  For- 
Diative  )ears  1^90-1860,  that  American  artists  needed  "efficiency, 
salesmanship,  pricing  shrewdness,  and  innovation."""  This  group  of 
nine  itinerants  showed  considerable  variety  in  their  natural  abilit\- 
and  training,  background  and  personality,  r\'pes  ot  portraits  offered, 
secondary  back-up  skills,  and  entrepreneurial  flair.  However,  they 
experienced  many  of  the  same  problems:  difficult}'  obtaining  com- 
missions and  procuring  supplies,  competition  and  pricing,  becom- 
ing known  in  a  new  community',  non-payment  for  portraits,  and  ar- 
duous travel. 

Bv  welcoming  and  encouraging  the  artists  passing  through 
Alexandria,  Guv  Atkinson  and  his  wife  Albina  added  to  the  life  ot 
the  town  and  to  its  cultural  history.  In  turn,  the  artists  and  other 
itinerants  brought  with  them  new  ideas  and  sophistication  to  further 
enliven  the  towns  they  visited.  In  Fredricksburg,  Virginia,  Nicholas 
Boudet  remarked  in  October  1812  the  necessity  for  the  townspeople 
"perpetuating  their  resemblances  for  the  gratification  ot  [their]  rela- 


JOURNAL   OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE   ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


tives."  Ironically,  while  these  artists  perpetuated  the  resemblances  of 
their  sitters  for  posterity,  they  themselves  often  faded  into  obscurity 
because  of  their  transient  lifestyles.  Though  their  role  is  not  yet 
widely  understood,  these  artists  deserve  a  place  in  the  social  history 
and  art  history  ot  the  American  South. 

MONA  L.  DEARBORN,  retired  from  the  National  Portrait  Gallery, 
is  an  independent  researcher  who  has  written  previously  on  American 
portrait  miniatures. 


NOTES 

1.  Quoted  in  William  B.  O'Neal,  Primitive  into  Painter:  Life  and  Letten  of  John  Toole 
(Charlottesville:  University  of  Virginia  Press,  i960),  iv  86.  John  Toole.  Richmond,  \a.,  to 
Jane  Toole,  Charlottesville,  Va.,  17  Jan.  1847.  My  thanks  to  Dr.  Ellen  Miles  for  reminding  me 
of  Toole's  letters. 

2.  Diary  of  William  DunLip.  3  vol.,  (New  York:  The  New- York  Historical  Society',  1931), 
2:386. 

3.  Ibid..  2:<i4^. 

4.  In  Richmond  in  1803,  John  Wood  offered  painted  miniatures  on  ivon-  or  "Vellum  pa- 
per" or  profile  "shades."  One  month  later,  in  Alexandria,  Wood  advertised  "The  Polygraphic 
Physiognatrace  ...  the  Inventor  of  the  method  of  taking  coloured  Likenesses  from  the  reflect- 
ed image  of  a  camera  obscura.  .  .  .  Black  shades  .  .  .  Profile  likenesses  in  miniature,  finished  in 
colours  and  black  lead  .  .  .  one  dollar  and  fifty  cents."  Alexandria  Advertiser  and  Commercial 
Intelligencer.  Virginia,  26  November  1803.  Unless  otherwise  noted,  transcriptions  of  newspa- 
pers and  documents  were  provided  by  the  MESDA  Research  Center. 

5.  Quoted  in  Alfred  C.  Prime.  The  Arts  and  Crafts  in  Philadelphia.  MaryUmd.  and  South 
Carolina.  17S6-1800  (Topsfield.  Mass.,  1932),  40. 

6.  In  "The  Evolution  of  American  Artists'  Studios.  1740-1860,"  Annette  Blaugrund  dis- 
cusses Benjamin  West's  painting  room  in  London  and  its  influence  on  his  American  students, 
and  also  includes  artists'  studios  in  New  York  City  in  the  period  of  1835-1860  (The Magazine 
ANTIQUES.  January  1992,  214-23).  The  anicle  is  not  concerned  with  rented  quarters  of  the 
typical  itinerant. 

7.  For  more  information  about  James  Warrell's  interesting  career  as  an  artist,  theatrical 
scene  painter,  and  museum  proprietor,  see  Linda  Crocker  Simmons,  "i8th  and  19th  Centun- 
Artists  Active  in  the  Lower  Shenandoah  Valley,"  Winchester-Fredrick  County  Historical  Society 
Journal  4:104-6.  See  also  R.  Lewis  Wright,  "James  Warrell,  Artist  and  Entrepreneur,"  Virginia 
Cavalcade.  Winter  1973,  5-19.  In  1788,  Warrell  advertised  in  Alexandria  as  a  dancing  master 
(Columbian  Mirror  and  Alexandria  Gazette.  22  August  1798). 

8.  Quoted  in  Joyce  Hill,  "New  England  Itinerant  Portraitists,"  in  Peter  Benes,  ed..  Itiner- 
ancy in  Neiv  England  and  New  York.  Proceedings  of  the  Dublin  Seminar  for  New  England 
Folklife  (Boston:  Boston  University,  1986),  154. 


ITINERANT   ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


9.  For  examples  of  jrtists  helping  each  other,  see  William  Dunlap,  History'  of  the  Rise  and 
Progrea  of  the  Arts  of  Design  m  the  United  States  {1834;  reprint,  New  York;  Dover,  1969).  Dun- 
lap  describes  how  Edward  Greene  Malbone  (1777-1807)  "showed  me  the  method  of  [properly] 
preparing  the  ivory,  and  furnished  me  with  many  valuable  hints  in  addition"  (vol.  2,  part  i,  p. 
20).  He  also  describes  how  Malbone  offered  to  show  John  Wesley  Jarvis  (1780-1840)  and 
Joseph  Wood  (c.  1773-1830)  "his  mode  of  proceeding,  from  the  preparation  of  ivory  to  the  fin- 
ishing of  the  picture"  (76-77).  Charles  Fraser  (1782-1860)  wrote  Anson  Dickinson  (1779- 
i8s2),  a  fellow  miniaturist,  on  21  May  1819  to  thank  Dickinson  for  sending  him  ivory  and  cases 
for  miniature  painting:  "I  have  but  four  glasses  left  and  not  a  case  or  Black  frame  is  to  be  found 
in  Charleston."  (Mona  Dearborn,  Anson  Dickinson,  the  Celebrated  Miniature  Painter.  1779-iSu 
(Hartford:  Connecticut  Historical  Society,  1983),  12.  Thomas  Sully  (1783-1872)  said  of  Charles 
Fraser's  help,  "He  was  rhe  first  person  that  ever  took  the  pains  to  instruct  me  in  the  rudiments 
of  the  art,  and  although  himself  a  tyro,  his  kindness,  and  the  progress  made  in  consequence  ot 
It.  determined  the  course  of  my  fijture  life."  In  Martha  Severens,  ed.  and  comp..  Charles  Fraser 
of  Charleston  (Charleston,  S.C:  Gibbes  Art  Gallery-,  1983),  23. 

10.  T.  Michael  Miller,  comp.,  .Artisans  and  Merchantt  of  Alexandria.  1-S0-1S20  (Bowie. 
Md.:  Heritage  Books  for  the  Alexandria  Libtan-,  1992),  i:i^,  i:2i--i8,  2:41.  Appendix  IX  con- 
sists of  the  1834  City  Directory  of  Alexandria,  D.  C.  which  includes  the  listing  "Atkinson,  Guy 
&  Son,  wine  and  grocery  store.  Fairfax  near  King  St."  (2:4^5)- 

11.  An  analvsis  ot  the  known  accommodations  of  the  itinerant  artists  who  worked  in 
Alexandria  before  1820.  based  on  a  rally  of  their  newspapet  advertisements,  is  instructive.  Four 
are  documented  ,is  staying  at  Guy  Atkinson's — William  R.  Birch,  Cephas  Thompson,  Cor- 
nelius Schroeder,  and  James  Manning  Leonard.  Three  orhers  were  also  on  Fairfax  Street — 
lohn  and  Thomas  Charies  Bell,  and  Mr.  Cromwell,  although  it  is  not  clear  in  the  advertise- 
ments precisely  where  they  lodged  on  Fairfax.  Louis  A.  Pise  offered  to  teach  "at  his  dwelling 
house  .  .  .  Fairf.ix  street,  the  house  of  Mrs.  Davis."  Nicholas  V.  Boudet  never  indicated  where 
he  lodged.  Perhaps  some  of  these  were  also  at  Atkinson's.  The  above  artists  will  be  discussed  in 
the  text. 

Fhree  itinerants  boarded  at  boarding  houses:  William  .MacGavin  (ac.  i-94-'8o4).  minia- 
turist, in  1804  at  Elizabeth  Cravcroft's  on  Fairfix  Street:  John  Wood,  profilist,  in  1803  at  Mr. 
Cunningham's  on  King  Street:  and  Carl  Weinedel  (i79s-l84S)  in  1820  at  Mrs.  Ashton's  on 
Fairtax  Street. 

Eight  lodged  at  taverns:  James  Evans  (ac.  1803)  and  John  tieorge  (ac.  1803),  profilists.  at  the 
Spread  Eagle  in  1S03:  Etienne  Moranges  (d.  1804),  miniaturist,  at  Mr.  Abert's  tavern  in  1-98 
(in  1-9-  he  lodged  with  a  Mr.  Hickman);  Marrha  Ann  Honewell  (c.  1787-1848?),  a  severely 
handicapped  artist  who  worked  with  fabric  and  paper,  at  the  Indian  Queen  in  1807;  John  Ver- 
monnet  (ac.  1792-180S),  miniaturist,  at  Mr.  Aberr's  tavern,  1794;  William  Joseph  Williams 
(I7'i9-i823),  portrait  and  miniature  painter,  at  Peter  Kemp's  tavern  in  1799;  and  Thaddeus  So- 
biesk)'  (ac.  1810-1820),  profilist  and  crayon  artist,  at  the  Indian  Queen  in  1810. 

Other  itinerant  artists  were  not  specific  about  their  location  in  town.  Several  asked  to  he 
contacted  at  the  shop  of  a  merchant,  jeweler,  or  in  the  case  ot  Jeremiah  Paul  (d.  1820),  portrait, 
miniature,  and  figure  painter,  at  Rachel  Atkins'  print  store  in  1802.  In  the  more  rural  areas,  it 
was  customary  for  a  portrait  artist  to  live  with  the  family  being  pottraved.  It  may  he  that  David 
Boudon  (1748-C.  1816).  miniaturist,  lived  with  the  Cazenove  tamilv  in  .Alexandria  when  he 
painted  the  six  members  ot  that  family  in  1806. 

12.  Data  abstracted  from  G.  Tern,'  Sharrer,  Commerce  and  Industry, "  in  John  D.  Macoll. 
ed.,  Alexandria,  a  Towne  in  Transition.  1S00-1900  (Alexandria  Bicentennial  Commission  and 
Alexandria  Historical  Society,  19^7),  20-22;  George  J.  Stansfield,  "Banks  and  Banking,"  in  the 


JOURNAL    OF    E.'\RLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


same  volume.  44.  Hor  discussions  oltonccntrations  ot  art  and  artists  in  the  Washington  area, 
including  NX'ashington  Cit>-,  Capitol  Hill,  Georgetown,  and  Alexandria,  sec  Andrew  J. 
Cosentino  and  Henry-  H.  Glassie.  The  Capitol hnage:  Painters  m  Washington,  tSoo-ivi^  (Wash- 
ington, D.C.:  Smithsonian  Institution  Press,  1983),  19-39.  See  also  Thomas  Froncek,  ed.,  the 
City  of  Washington:  An  I Uustrated  History  (New  York:  Knopf,  for  the  Junior  League  ot  Wash- 
ington, 1977;  reprint,  Avenel,  N.J.  Wings  Booki;,  1992),  chs.  1-3. 

13.  Miller,  Artisans  and  Merchants  of  Alexandria.  i:xvi. 

14.  For  a  lively  account  of  the  history  of  Market  Square,  see  lames  D.  Munson,  "The 
.Alexandria  Market  Square,"  Alexandria  History.  (Alexandria,  Virginia:  Alexandria  Historical 
Society,  1980),  2:16-27. 

15.  P.  L.  Brockett,  The  Lodge  of  Washington:  A  History  of  the  Alexandria-Washington  Lodge 
No.  22,  /7*J-/<?7(? (Alexandria.  Virginia:  George  D.  French.  1876),  143. 

16.  James  D.  Munson,  comp.,  Alexandria.  Virginia:  Alexandria  Hustings  Court  Deeds 
I78}-I797,  1:60. 

17.  T.  Michael  Miller,  transcriber,  Alexandria  and  Alexandria  (Arlington)  Counts-  \'nginia 
Minister  Returns  and  Marriage  Bonds  iSoi-18^2  (Bowie,  Md.:  Heritage  Books.  19S7)  2;  Wesley 
E.  Pippenger,  Husbands  and  Wives  Associated  with  Early  Alexandria.  Virginia  (Westminster, 
Md.:  Family  Line  Publications,  1991).  3.  lists  Albina  erroneously  as  the  daughter  of  a  loseph 
Birch. 

iS.  Brockett,  Lodge  of  Washington.  143. 

19.  Patrick  G.  Wardell,  comp.,  Alexandria  City  and  County  Virginia  Wills.  Administrations 
and  Guardian  Bonds  1800-1870  (Bowie,  Maryland:  Heritage  Books,  1986),  4-5.  Will  Book  4 
(1831-1847).  92.  Guy  Atkinson's  death  is  noted  in  Obituary  Notices  from  the  Alexandria  Gazette 
1784-igi^  as  appearing  in  the  Alexandria  Gazette.  23  May  1835  (Bowie.  Md.:  Heritage  BooLs. 
1987),  10.  Albina's  death  was  reported  in  the  Alexandria  Herald.  12  Januan-  1818.  See  also 
Miller,  Artisans  and  Merchants.  2:422.  The  inscription  on  Guy  Atkinson's  tombstone  reads: 
"Sacred  /  to  the  memory  of  /  GUY  ATKINSON  /  a  native  of  /  Kings  County,  Ireland  / 
Barony  of  Clonlisk  /  Family  residence  Camgort  /  and  for  19  years  a  citizen  of/  Virginia  /  who 
departed  this  life  /  May  21st  .^.D.  1835  /  in  the  — th  year/  of  his  age."  Wesley  E.  Pippenger, 
Tombstone  Inscriptions  of  Alexandria.  \'irginia  (Westminster,  .\1d.:  Famih-  Line  Publications, 
1991).  3:88. 

20.  Erhelyn  Cox,  Historic  Alexandria  Virginia.  Street  by  Street,  a  Survey  of  Existing  Early 
Buildings  (Alexandria,  Virginia:  Historic  Alexandria  Foundation.  1976),  39.  A  copy  of  an  ab- 
stract of  the  Records  of  the  Mutual  Assurance  Society  of  Virginia  at  Llovd  House  Historical 
Library,  Alexandria,  manuscript  collection  (Alexandria  Association  records,  box  263X,  file  6), 
describes  in  detail  Atkinson's  properties  as  they  were  insured  in  August  1805. 

21.  Miller,  Artisans  and  Merchants.  1:96.  Darrah.  the  dentist,  also  stayed  at  Atkinson's  on 
repeat  visits  to  Alexandria  in  1821.  1822,  and  1823.  See  T.  Michael  Miller,  Portrait  of  a  Toivn: 
Alexandria.  District  of  Columbia  i820-i8jo  {hov/ie.  Md.:  Heritage  Books,  199s). 

22.  R.  Lewis  Wright.  Artists  in  Virginia  before  woo:  An  Annotated  Checklist  (Charlottesville: 
University  Press  of  Virginia,  for  the  Virginia  Historical  Society.  1983).  3.  The  error  is  due  to  a 
misreading  of  an  advertisement  in  the  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette.  Commercial  6-  Political  4  Oc- 
tober i8n,  which  has  been  perpetuated  in  print. 

23.  Prime,  The  Arts  and  Crafts  m  Philadelphia.  Maiyland.  and  South  Carolina..  40. 

24.  This  information  was  first  printed  in  Fillmore  Norfleet,  Saint-Memin  in  \  'irgmia:  Por- 
traits and  Biographies.  (Richmond,  Va:  The  Dietz  Press,  1942),  31-32.  It  was  repeated  in  the 
catalog  by  the  Alexandria  Association,  Our  Town.  i749-iS6s.(i:he  Alexandria  Association, 
1956),  40  and  again  in  Cox,  Street  by  Street.  39.  See  Ellen  G.  Miles,  Saint-Memin  and  the  Neo- 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


clasiicat  Profile  Portrait  in  America  (Washington,  D.C.  :  The  National  Portrait  Gallery  and  the 
Smithsonian  Institution  Press,  1994),  134  and  226,  n.13.  For  a  discussion  of  Birch  "filling  up 
profiles  in  an  elegant  style,"  as  he  advertised  in  Alexandria  and  Baltimore  in  1805,  see  Miles, 
Saim-Memin  and  the  Neockaicat  Profile  Portrait  in  America,  120,  161-62  and  figure  6:is,  on 
127,  a  Mrs.  Harrison,  watercolor  on  paper,  1807. 

IS.  William  Birch,  "The  Life  of  William  Russell  Birch,  Enamel  Painter,  Written  by  Him- 
self," unpublished  autobiography,  n.d.  (r\'ped  transcription,  si  pp-).  Birch  Papers,  The  Histori- 
cal Societ>-  of  Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia,  5.  This  absorbing  document,  which  mcludes  his  ap- 
praisal of  the  arts  in  America,  is  of  interest  to  many  disciplines  on  many  levels. 

26.  .Although  the  literature  about  William  Birch  is  extensive,  a  definitive  study  of  his  work 
has  yet  to  be  written.  The  following  sources  were  the  most  relevant  to  this  study.  George  C. 
Groce  and  David  H.  Wallace,  The  New-York  Historical  Society's  Dictionary  of  Artists  in  Ameri- 
ca, IS64-1860  (New  Haven  and  London:  Yale  University  Press,  1957),  51-52-  .lean  Lambert 
Brockway,  "William  Birch:  His  American  Enamel  Portraits,"  Antiques,  (September  1933): 
94-96.  Martin  P.  Snyder,  "The  City  of  Independence  in  Prints:  1775-1838,"  American  An- 
tiques, (December  1977):  22-28.  Marvin  Chauncey  Ross,  "William  Birch,  Enamel  Miniatur- 
ist," Collector.  (July  194c):  i,  20.  Prime,  Alfred  C.,  Arts  and  Crafts  m  Philadelphia.  Maryland 
and  South  Carolina.  1786-1800  (Topsfield,  Mass.,  1932),  4-5,  66. 

27.  Martin  P.  Snyder,  "William  Birch:  His  Country  Seats  of  the  United  States,"  The  Penn- 
sylvania Magazine  of  History  and  Biography,  July  1957,  225-29.  See  also,  Martin  P.  Snyder, 
"William  Birch:  His  Philadelphia  Views."  The  Pennsylvania  Magazine  of  History  and  Biography. 
1949,  271. 

28.  Birch,  unpublished  autobiography,  4. 

29.  Ihid..  4-6.  Snvder,  Country  Seats.  226-28.  See  also  Gloria  Gilda  Dcak.  Picturing  Ameri- 
ca. i4g^-tSti<).  2  vols.  (N.J.:  Princeton  University  Press,  1988),  1:150-5,  160-3,  ■"o-i;  see  v.  2  tor 
illustrations.  Rosalie  Stier  Calvert  (1778-1821),  in  letters  from  her  Maryland  plantation  to  her 
family  in  Belgium,  described  William  Birch  visiting  Riversdale  and  his  plans  for  the  grounds; 
see  Margaret  Law  Callcott,  ed..  Mistress  of  Riversdale:  The  Plantation  Letters  of  Rosalie  Stier 
Calvert.  i-g'i-iSii  (Baltimore:  Johns  Hopkins  Universir\-  Ptess,  1991 1,  54".  i34-  '4**'  '**o. 

30.  Birch,  unpublished  autobiography,  6. 

31. //w..-. 

32.  Theodore  Bolton,  Early  American  Portrait  Painters  m  Miniature.  (New  ^ork:  F.  F. 
Sherman.  1921).  10-13;  Dale  T.  Johnson,  American  Portrait  Miniatures  in  the  Manney  Collec- 
tion. (New  York:  The  Metropolitan  Museum  of  Art,  1990).  82-85;  and  the  Catalog  of  Ameri- 
can Porttaits,  a  research  facility  of  the  National  Portrait  Gallery,  Smithsonian  Institution, 
Washington,  D.C.  (an  excellent  portrait  archive  for  portrait  research). 

33.  William  Dunlap,  History  of  the  Rise  and  Progress  of  the  Arts  of  Design  m  the  United  States. 
1  vol.  (1834;  reprint.  New  York:  Dover,  1969),  1:432. 

34.  lames  L.  Yarnall  and  William  H.  Gerdts,  comps..  The  National  Museum  of  American 
Art's  Index  to  .American  .4rt  Exhibition  Catalogs  from  the  beginning  through  the  1S76  Centennial 
Year.  6  vol.  (Boston:  G.  K.  Hall,  1986)  1:320;  Beatrice  B.  Garvan,  Federal  Philadelphia. 
itS^-iSjs.  the  Athens  of  the  Western  World,  (Philadelphia  Museum  of  Art,  198-),  t7,  96,  figs. 
26-27;  Johnson,  Miniatures  in  the  Manney  Collection,  82-85. 

35.  The  Federal  Gazette  &  Baltimore  Daily  Advertiser.  15  October  1805. 

36.  Alexandria  Daily  Advertiser.  23  June  1808;  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette.  16  September  1808; 
Alexandria  Daily  Gazette.  14  March  i8og.  For  information  on  George  Birch,  see  Groce  and 
Wallace,  Dictionary  of  Artists.  51;  H.  Glenn  Brown  and  Maude  O.  Brown,  A  Directory  of  the 
Book-A  ns  and  Book  Trade  in  Philadelphia  to  1820.  Including  Painters  and  Engravers  (New  York: 
New  York  Public  l.ibran-,  1950),  19; 


34  JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


37-  Baltimore  Iireniiig  Pat..  }  March  1809;  I  irgima  Hi-mU  Fredericksburg,  4  March  1809. 
William  Birch,  rhe  tather  of  George  Birch,  had  also  visited  George  Washington  Parke  Gustis 
in  1805.  See  William  Birch,  unpublished  autobiography.  •!.  and  Snyder,  Country  Seats.  228  for  a 
transcription  from  the  autobiography,  although  some  lines  have  been  omitted.  William  Birch 
described  the  elegant  situation  of  Arlington  House  and  Gustis'  plans. 

38.  Snyder,  Country  Seats,  228-29. 

39.  Gephas  Thompson  is  usually  mentioned  in  any  discussion  of  southern  painting  because 
he  traveled  in  the  South  during  the  colder  months  for  about  eighteen  years,  and  is  said  to  have 
painted  more  than  five  hundred  portraits  in  the  southern  states.  See  Groce  and  Wallace.  Dic- 
tionary of  Artists,  625-26;  Linda  Grocker  Simmons,  "Non-Academic  Painting  in  Maryland, 
Virginia,  Kentucky  and  the  Carolinas,"  The  Southern  Quarterly.  Fall/Winter  1985,  39-41;  Ella- 
Prince  Knox  et  al..  eds..  Painting  in  the  South:  IS64-1980,  (Richmond:  Virginia  Museum,  1983), 
54.  55;  Estill  Gurtis  Pennington,  Messengers  of  Style:  Itinerancy  and  Taste  in  Southern  Portrai- 
ture. 1784-186-.  (Greenville,  S.G.:  Greenville  Gounty  Museum  of  Art.  1993),  21,  47;  Estill  Gur- 
tis Pennington  and  James  G.  Kelly.  The  South  on  Paper:  Line.  Color  and  Light,  (Spartanburg, 
S.G.:  Robert  M.  Hicklin  Jr.).  5.  61;  Hill.  "New  England  Irinerant  Portraitists."  167. 

40.  Alexandria  Daily  Advertiser.  19  December  1807;  Alexandria  Daily  Advertiser.  i<,  Febru- 
ary 1808;  Our  Town,  104. 

41.  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette,  9  May  1809;  Gox.  Street  by  Street,  39. 

42.  Gephas  Thompson's  Memorandum  of  Ponraits  is  owned  by  the  Boston  Athenaeum, 
gift  ot  Madeleine  Thompson  Edmonds  (Mss.  L303  vol.D)  Hereafter  referred  to  as  Thompson 
Memorandum.  Mv  thanks  to  Gatharina  Slautterback  and  Stephen  Nonack.  Boston 
Athenaeum. 

43.  In  1804  in  Gharleston,  Thompson  was  more  specific  and  offered  "Likenesses  in  large, 
demi.  and  small  sizes.  He  also  cuts  PROFILES,  with  his  machine  .  .  .  paint  PROFILES  and 
executes  them  in  gold."  as  quoted  in  Anna  Wells  Rutledge,  Artists  in  the  Life  of  Charleston, 
through  Colony  and  State  from  Restoration  to  Reconstruction  (Philadelphia:  American  Philosoph- 
ical Society.  1949;  reprint.  Golumbia.  S.G.:  University  of  South  Garolina  Press.  1980),  221.  See 
also  Whaley  Batson,  "Gharles  Peale  Polk:  Gold  Profiles  on  Glass."  Journal  of  Early  Southern 
Decorative  Arts,  November  19—.  51.  which  mentions  Thompson's  "delineating  machine." 

44.  The  portrait  is  in  the  collection  of  the  Virginia  Museum  of  Fine  Arts,  Richmond.  See 
Our  Town,  9,  plate  \T. 

45.  Appleton's  Enyclopaedia  of  American  Biography.  6  vols.  (New  York:  D.  Appleton.  1887). 
6:88. 

46.  Groce  and  Wallace.  Dictionary  of  Artists,  625-26. 

47.  Transcriptions  of  Thompson's  advertisements,  as  well  as  Rutledge,  Artists  in  Charleston, 
131.  221.  For  Richmond  see  Richmond  Portraits.  Makers  of  Richmond.  i^p-iS6o.  (Richmond. 
Va.:  Valentine  Museum.  1949).  233-34.  24.5-  256;  and  Virginius  C.  Hall.  Jr.,  comp..  Portraits  in 
the  Collection  of  the  Virginia  Historical  Society,  (Gharlottesville:  University  Press  of  Virginia. 
1981),  28,  55.  For  New  Orleans  see  John  A.  Mahe  II  and  Rosanne  McGaffrey.  eds..  Encylopae- 
dia  of  New  Orleans  Artists  1718-1918.  (New  Orleans:  Historic  New  Orleans  Gollection.  1987). 
374- 

48.  Paul  Staiti,  "The  1823  Exhibition  of  the  South  Carolina  Academy  of  Fine  Arts:  A  Para- 
digm of  Gharleston  Taste?"  in  David  Moltke-Hansen.  ed..  Art  in  the  Lives  of  South  CaroUnians, 
Nineteenth-Century  Chapters.  (Gharleston.  S.G.:  Garolina  Art  Association.  1979).  nos.  49.  52 
and  54  in  the  1823  exhibition. 

49.  Our  Town,  104. 

50.  The  most  complete  account  of  the  Gephas  Thompson  family  is  to  be  found  in  Man- 
ning Leonard,  Memorial:  Genealogical  Historical  and  Biographical  of  Solomon  Leonard  i6r. 


ITINERANT   ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


Diixhiay  dnii  Bridgewiiter,  Miusaclnisetts,  (Southbridge,  Massachusetts,  1896),  227-29.  Cephas 
1  honipsim  married  Olive  Leonard  (1780-1819)  in  1802;  rhey  had  eight  children.  See  also  Groce 
and  Wallace.  Dictionary  of  Artists.  626-27,  tor  the  three  who  were  artists. 

■ii.  Alexandria  Advertiser,  28  December  180-,  until  i  March  180S.  See  Miller,  Artisans  and 
Merchants,  2:163. 

52.  Caroline  Leonard  Coodenough.  Memoirs  of  the  Leonard.  Vhompson  and  Haskell  Fami- 
lies, (Yellow  Springs,  Ohio:  .^ntioch  Press,  1928),  ~S. 

53.  Groce  and  Wallace,  Dictionary  of  Artists,  6i<,. 

54.  Alexandria  Daily  Advertiser,  14  March  1808.  For  more  on  Bell,  see  Groce  and  Wallace, 
Dictionary  of  Artists,  42;  and  J.  Hall  Pleasants,  "Studies  in  Maryland  Painting"  Maryland  His- 
torical Society  files,  Baltimore.  Bell  and  his  son  are  mentioned  in  passing  in  Stiles  Turtle  Col- 
will,  "A  Chronicle  of  Artists  in  Joshua  Johnson's  Baltimore,"  in  Carolyn  J.  Weekley  and  Stiles 
Turtle  Colwill,  Joshua  Johnson.  Freeman  and  Early  American  Portrait  Painter,  (Williamsburg, 
Va.,  and  Baltimore,  1987),  88.  J.  Hall  Pleasants  noted  in  his  research  material,  "There  was  a 
Bell  family  ot  Scottish  (?)  painters  at  Fells  Point,  Baltimore,  berween  1809  and  1816."  The  Diel- 
man-HaN-ward  file  at  the  Maryland  Historical  Society  Libran,',  Baltimore,  contains  a  handwrit- 
ten note  on  a  card  that  John  Bell  died  "8/25/1816  aet.  49." 

55.  Ihe  two  portraits  (figs.  8,  9)  were  first  attributed  to  John  Bell  bv  J.  Hall  Pleasants,  who 
compared  them  to  the  portrait  ot  Dr.  John  Gray  (1785-1823)  at  the  Man.Jand  Historical  Soci- 
ety, signed  "L  C.  Bell  Delin."  At  that  time,  the  profiles  were  identified  as  Moses  Myers 
(1753-1835)  and  John  Myers  (1787-1830).  This  identification  is  now  considered  incorrect;  each 
is  called  Portrait  of  a  Man  (Msi. 1.268  and  M51.1.26-  respectively).  The  c.  1816  date  is  derived 
trom  the  pieces  ot  the  Baltimore  Federal  Republican  and  Baltimore  Felcgram  newspaper,  dated 
20  and  22  August  1S16,  that  are  pasted  to  the  back  ot  one  profile.  A  handwritten  card  in  the 
Dielman-Hanvard  hie,  Lihran  of  the  Maryland  Historical  Societ>',  states  that  John  Bell  died 
"8/25/1816  aet  49."  Ihc  profiles  could  have  been  framed  either  betore  or  after  John  Bell's  death. 
According  to  the  J.  Hall  Pleasants  Studies  in  MarxJand  Painting  files  at  the  Mar\'land  Histori- 
cal Society  (3666  &  3667),  these  watercolors  descended  rhrough  the  family  of  Moses  Myers 
and  his  wife  Eliza  Judd  (or  Judah)  and  were  acquired  by  the  Moses  Myers  House  in  Norfolk, 
now  a  part  of  the  Chr\'sler  Museum,  at  some  time  after  1926.  Special  thanks  to  Irene 
Roughton,  Chn>'sler  Museum,  for  her  help. 

56.  For  Jacob  Gregg  (1768-1832),  silversmith,  see  Miller,  Artisans  and  Merchants.  1:1-3,  •incl 
especially,  Catherine  B.  Hollan.  In  the  Neatest.  Most  Fashionable  Manner:  Three  Centuries  of 
Alexandria  Silver,  (Alexandria,  Va.:  The  Lyceum,  1994),  141-4-- 

57.  Alexandria  Daily  Advertiser,  14  March  1808,  Courtesy  of  Lloyd  House  Libran-  ot  'Vir- 
ginia History  and  Genealogy,  Alexandria,  Va.  Hereafter  cited  as  Lloyd  House,  Alexandria. 

58.  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette.  Commercial  CT Political  8  August  1808. 

59.  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette.  26  June  1809.  See  Groce  and  Wallace,  Dictionaiy  of  Artists. 
155.  Although  all  newspaper  notices  known  to  this  wrirer  simply  say  Mr.  Cromwell,  one  trom 
an  1809  Hudson,  N.Y.,  paper  gives  the  name  as  D.  H.  Cromwell,  while  a  miniature  portrait  ot 
Col.  Michel-Louis  Juchcreau-Duchesn.iy  at  the  .\1cCord  Museum,  Montreal,  which  is  attrib- 
uted to  Cromwell,  bears  the  initials  "R.C."  For  more  about  cut-paper  profilists  active  in 
Alexandria,  see  Mona  Dearborn,  "Isaac  Todd's  1804  Alexandria  Profiles,"  The  Alexandria 
Chronicle,  (Alexandria  Historical  Socierv-,  spring  1994),  especially  Appendix  B,  15-18. 

60.  Quebec  Mercury,  8  August  1808.  See  also  Roslyn  M.  Rosenteld,  "An  Index  ot  Miniatur- 
ists and  Silhouettists  who  worked  in  Montreal, "  The  Journal  of  Canadian  Art  History  (1981)  V, 
no.  2,  112,  114-15.  For  recent  research  about  ,\nierican  artists  in  Canada,  see  Lvdia  Foy.  "New 
England  and  New  York  Portrait  Makers  in  Canada,  1-60-1860, "  in  Peter  Benes,  ed..  Painting 


36  JOL!RN.-\L    OF    E.-\RLV    SOUTHERN    DECOR.-kTIVE    .\RTS  SUMMER    I996 


iiiid  Portr.ut  Making  in  the  Ainericin  Nnrtheasl.  Proceedings,  the  Duhlin  Seniiii.ir  for  New 
England  Fulklite  (Boston:  Boston  Universit)',  199s).  107-117. 

61.  In  the  Qtiebec  Giizftte,  20  October  1808,  the  entire  evening's  program  for  Mr. 
Cromwell's  Benefit  is  described.  See  J.  Russell  Harper,  Painting  in  Canada,  (Toronto:  Univer- 
sity of  Toronto  Press,  1966),  116-17,  and  J.  Russell  Harper,  Ear/y  Paintfrs  aiul  Engraven  in 
Canada,  (1  oronto:  University  of  Toronto  Press,  1970),  79. 

62.  Maryland  Gazette,  Annapolis,  9  August  1S09.  Republican  Star  or  Eastern  Shore  General 
Advertiser,  Hasten,  Md.,  5  September  1809. 

63.  Baltimore  Evening  Post,  24  Januar)-  and  27  Januar)'  1810.  Hor  a  di.scussion  of  artists 
working  in  Baltimore  in  1810,  see  Colwill.  "Chronicle  of  Artists  in  Baltimore, "  in  Weekley, 
Joshua  Johnson.  Freeman  .  85-88. 

64.  Times,  Charleston,  S.C.,  22  December  iSio;  1^  April  and  29  July  1811.  Rutlcdge,  Artists 
in  Charleston,  192,  229,  2^6,  and  219  for  lohn  Rubens  Smith. 

65.  Rutledge,  Artists  in  Charleston,  192. 

66.  The  first  brief  notice  appeared  in  the  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette,  16  September  1811.  The 
larger  notice  was  printed  in  the  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette.  Commercial  0~  Political  4  October 
iSii. 

67.  Alexandria  Daily  Gazettte.  Commercial  &  Political  12  October  1811:  "Removal  /  The 
Portrait  Painting  Room  /  Is  removed  to  the  house  on  Prince  street  formerly  occupied  as  a  Post 
Office.  It  will  be  open  as  usual  every  day  for  persons  wishing  to  employ  the  Artists,  and  for  vis- 
itors every  Sarurdax". "  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette,  Commercial  and  Political  20  April  1812:  "Re- 
moval./ The  Painting  Room  is  removed  from  the  House  on  Prince  street,  to  the  House  on 
Washington  street,  next  door  to  the  Marshals'  Office,  near  the  Corner  of  King  street,  and 
nearly  opposite  to  the  dwelling  of  Robert  Young,  Esq."  Bonder's  advertisement  in  the  same 
newspaper  on  18  June  1812  announces  the  removal  of  the  Portrait  and  Miniature  Painting 
Room  to  Prince  Street,  opposite  Mr.  Mead's  dwelling  house,  and  lists  the  "Price  of  high  fin- 
ished paintings,  viz:/A  full  size  portrait  with  hands,  $100. /A  portrait  in  bust,  $50. /Miniature, 
S50. /Smaller  size,  S25." 

68.  See  Groce  and  Wallace,  Dictionary'  of  Artists,  SO";  Prime,  Arts  and  Crafts.  i'S6—iSoo,  29; 
Brown  and  Brown.  Book-Arts  and  Book  Trade,  96;  Colwill  in  Weeklev,  Joshua  Johnson.  Free- 
man, 79. 

69.  Philadelphia  citations  are  given  in  Prime,  Arts  and  Crafts  in  PhiLidelphia.  Maryland, 
and  South  Carolina.  29. 

70.  Maryland  Gazette,  Annapolis,  8  October  1801,  12  September  iSos.  For  Charles  Con- 
stantine  Pise,  see  The  Dictionary  of  American  Biography  (New  York:  Scribner,  1964),  7:634-35. 

71.  Pise  advertised  his  presence  in  Baltimore  in  the  Telegraph  and  Daily  Advertiser  on  29 
May  1806;  the  American  and  Commercial  Daily  Advertiser  on  17  June  1806;  the  Baltimore 
Evening  Post  on  14  October  1807;  Federal  Gazette  &  Baltimore  Daily  Advertiser  on  2  May  1808; 
and  the  American  and  Commercial  Daily  Advertiser  on  31  January  1810.  Between  1811  and  1814 
Pise  is  not  listed  in  the  Baltimore  city  directories.  He  reappears  in  the  Federal  Gazette  &  Balti- 
more Daily  Advertiser  on  is  July  and  19  October  1815.  and  is  listed  in  the  1816  Edward  Matchett 
Baltimore  city  directory  as  a  "portrait  painter  and  teacher  of  drawing. "  In  rhe  1817  James 
Kennedy  Baltimore  cit\'  director)',  he  is  described  as  a  "landscape  painter  and  teacher  of  draw- 
ing." He  advertised  again  in  the  American  &  Commercial  Daily  Advertiser  on  31  January  1818. 
Pise  advertised  in  Easton  in  the  Easton  Gazette  &  Eastern  Shore  Intelligencer  on  28  June  1819. 
See  note  75  for  his  Alexandria  and  Georgetown  notices. 

72.  That  Pise  was  comfortable  working  in  several  media  is  clear  from  his  notices.  In  the 
Alexandria  Daily  Gazetteot  23  July  1811  he  offers  to  teach  drawing  as  it  is  taught  in  Italy, "  and  a 


ITINERANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA  37 


niititc  in  the  Ainenciin  c~  Commercial  Daily  Advertiier.  Baltimore,  reads,  "teaches  drawing  in 
black  and  red  cloth  \<ic]  likewise  in  water  colors."  (By  "cloth"  the  printer  undoubtedly  meant 
"chalk,"  rather  like  the  pastel  used  today.)  For  reference  to  painting  in  oils,  see  note  77.  Pise 
also  taught  the  French  language  in  Annapolis,  Baltimore,  Alexandria,  and  Georgetown,  ac- 
cording to  his  notices;  see  especially  the  National  linelligencer.  Washington,  D.C.,  2  July  1812. 

73.  MaryLind  Gazette,  Annapolis,  8  October  1801 ;  American  &  Commercial  Daily  Advertiser. 
Baltimore,  17  June  1806. 

74.  In  Alexandria  Pise  advertised  in  the  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette  on  12  June  1810,  2'i  May 
1811,  and  23  July  1811.  On  2  July  1812  he  advertised  in  the  Natiomil  Intelligencer.  Washington, 
D.C..  that  he  was  in  Georgetown,  around  the  time  that  the  Portrait  and  \4iniature  Paintmg 
Room  ceased  to  exist  in  Alexandria. 

75.  In  1822  in  Baltimore,  Pise  and  three  ot  his  young  children  died:  Eliza,  one  year  old,  and 
Cornelia,  eleven  days  old,  within  one  hour  on  30  August;  Edward,  five  years  old,  on  12  Sep- 
tember; and  Louis  Pise  himself  on  22  November.  The  Louis  Henry  Dielman  and  Francis  Sid- 
ney Hayward  Biographical  File  of  .Manlanders,  Librar\-  of  the  Maryland  Flistorical  Society. 
Baltimore. 

^6.  The  reference  ro  "Likenesses  in  oil"  appeared  in  the  Alexandria  Daily  Gazette.  12  June 
iSio;  Federal  Gazette  and  Baltimore  Daily  Advertiier.  22  June  1^99. 

77.  Letter  from  M.  Samatan,  Marseilles,  France,  to  Stephen  Girard,  Philadelphia,  30  July 
1791,  introducing  Mr.  Boudet,  "a  skilful  painter."  Stephen  Girard  Papers,  Girard  College, 
Philadelphia.  See  also  Robert  D.  Schwartz,  The  Stephen  Girard  Collection.  (Philadelphia:  Gi- 
rard College,  1982),  6.  For  more  on  Stephen  Girard,  see  Marvin  W.  McFarland,  Stephen  Gi- 
rard: A  Verf  Human  Human  Being.  (Philadelphia:  Girard  College,  ig-"'),  1-18,  and  Harry 
Emerson  Wildes,  Lonely  M'dtu.  the  Story  of  Stephen  Girard.  (New  York/Toronto;  Farrar  & 
Rinehart,  1943). 

78.  Groce  and  Wallace,  Dictionary  of  Artists.  67-68;  Rutledge,  Artists  in  Charleston.  126, 
187;  Richmond  Portraits.  241.  The  Bremen  reference  in  Rutledge  and  elsewhere  is  clarified  by  a 
letter  from  Nicholas  Boudet,  Philadelphia,  to  Stephen  Girard,  Philadelphia,  2  November  1813, 
Girard  Papers,  tiirard  College,  Philadelphia,  1813:373;  the  ship  that  carried  the  Boudet  family 
from  Bordeaux  to  Charleston  sailed  from  Bremen,  Germany. 

-9.  First  quoted  in  Nanc\'  E.  Richards,  "A  Most  Perfect  Resemblance  at  Moderate  Prices, 
the  Miniatures  of  David  Boudon,"  Winterthur  Portfolio.  19^4,  no.  9,  86. 

80.  Richards  placed  Boudon  in  Alexandria  in  1801.  1804,  and  "mid  1806  when  he  was  com- 
missioned to  draw  the  likenesses  of  Anthony  Charles  Cazenove  and  his  family."  These  profiles 
in  silverpoint  and  watercolor  on  vellum  are  in  rhe  collection  ot  the  Henn,-  Francis  Du  Pont 
Winterthur  Museum. 

81.  American  &  Commercial  Daily  Advertiser.  Baltimore,  3  October  1810. 

82.  American  dr  Commercial  Daily  Advertiser,  Baltimore,  ^  August  1811. 

83.  National  Intelligencer.  Washington  City,  16  June  1812. 

84.  Virginia  Herald  Fredericksburg,  10  October  1812.  In  1811  Nicholas  Boudet's  son,  Do- 
minic William  Boudet,  painted  three  sets  of  copies  of  portraits  for  General  John  Mason,  who 
was  living  in  1811  on  Analosron  Island  (now  T,  Roosevelt  Island).  D.  W.  Boudet  may  have 
been  involved  at  times  in  the  Portrait  and  Miniature  Painting  Room,  but  we  do  know  that  in 
1811  he  was  engaged  in  making  copies  of  portraits  painted  by  John  Hesselius  (1728-1778)  of 
George  Mason  (i72';-i792)  and  his  wife  Ann  Eilbeck  Mason  (1-34-1774),  the  originals  of 
which  are  now  lost.  This  information  is  confirmed  by  Susan  Borchardt,  curator  of  Gunston 
Hall,  in  a  telephone  converstion  of  5  March  1993.  D.  W.  Boudet's  reputation  today  rests  on 
these  copies,  as  thev  are  the  only  known  portraits  ot  Ann  and  George  Mason,  See  Our  Town. 
2i  and  plates  VI 1  and  IX. 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


85.  Leiter  trom  Nicholis  Boudet,  Philadelphia  to  Stephen  Girard,  Philadelphia.  2  Novem- 
ber 1813,  Girard  Papers,  Girard  College,  Philadelphia.  1813:373.  According  to  this  letter,  Boudet 
had  studied  naval  engineering  in  France,  and  the  ship  he  designed  for  Girard  vv'as  actually  built 
and  subsequently  modified.  Thanks  to  Phyllis  Abrams  for  providing  this  informative  docu- 
ment. For  more  on  Sally  Bickhani,  Girard's  Quaker  housekeeper,  see  Wildes,  Lonely  Midas, 
74--S,  136-4-. 

86.  One  indication  of  the  value  of  money  in  1811  Alexandria  is  contained  in  a  letter  from 
Elijah  Fletcher,  a  teacher  at  a  local  academy,  stating  that  he  would  pay  his  French  teacher  $jo. 
for  tutoring  him  one  or  two  hours  an  evening  for  a  year.  Martha  von  Briesen,  The  Letten  of 
Elijah  Fletcher,  (Charlottesville:  University  Press  of  Virginia.  1965),  29. 

87.  See  Federal  Gazette  &  Baltimore  Advertiser,  Mar,'land,  27  June  i8i8;  for  Battle  of  North 
Point,  see  American  &  Commercial  Daily  Advertiser,  Baltimore,  17  September  1819.  For  insol- 
vency see  Baltimore  Patriot  and  Merchantite  Advertiser,  11  February  1820  and  Baltimore  Patriot 
and  Merchantile  Advertiser,  25  March  1820.  For  more  on  Dominic  William  Boudet,  see  entries 
under  both  first  names  in  Groce  and  Wallace,  Dictionary  of  Artists,  67-68. 

88.  Alexandria  Herald,  11  November  1S16  and  Alexandria  Gazette.  Commercial  and  Political 
9  November  1816. 

89.  In  the  Raleigh  Register,  Raleigh,  North  Carolina,  i-  November  1806,  Schroeder  states 
that  he  "has  been  employed  tor  two  years  past  in  the  Carolinas  and  for  Fifteen  Dollars  (his 
price)  he  warrants  a  correct  likeness." 

90.  Columbian  Museum  &  Savannah  Advertiser,  Georgia,  4  December  1807.  Augusta 
Chronicle,  Georgia,  30  July  1808,  where  he  took  the  room  formerly  occupied  by  Mr.  Cloriviere 
(see  Groce  and  Wallace,  Dictionary  of  Artists,  132),  a  fellow  miniaturist.  Augusta  Herald,  Geor- 
gia, 12  January  1809  and  Augusta  Chronicle,  Georgia,  14  January  1809.  In  Savannah  in  Decem- 
ber 1807.  specimens  of  his  work  could  be  seen  at  Marquand  &  Pauldmg's,  silversmidis.  See 
also  Republican  and  Savannah  Evening  Ledger,  Savannah,  Georgia,  21  March  1809.  In  New 
York  City,  Schroeder  was  listed  as  a  miniature  painter  (sometimes  as  Schroder  or  Shroder)  in 
David  Longworth's  city  directory,  and  in  1814  in  George  Long's  directory.  See  also  George  L. 
McKay,  A  Register  of  Artists.  Engravers.  Booksellers.  Bookbinders.  Printers  &  Publishers  in  New 
York  City.  t6;i-!820,  (New  York:  New  York  Public  Library,  1942),  The  1817-1818  sources  are 
The  Savannah  Republican,  is  March  1817,  wherein  "Shroder"  notes  that  he  was  dividing  his 
time  between  Savannah  and  Augusta,  and  that  he  had  "taken  the  room  in  the  Exchange,  for- 
merly occupied  by  Mr.  E3i\." Alexandria  Herald,.  21  August  1818  and  Alexandria  Gazette  & 
Daily  Advertiser.  25  August  1818. 

91.  Richmond  Enquirer,  Virginia,  20  November  1818,  and  Richmond  Commercial  Compiler, 
Virginia,  19  October  1818.  See  also  Richmond  Portraits,  243.  For  Canada,  see  J.  Russell  Harper, 
Early  Painters  and  Engravers  in  Canada.  (Toronto:  University  of  Toronto  Press,  1970),  282; 
and  Roslyn  M.  Rosenfeld,  "An  Index  of  Miniaturists  and  Silhouettists  who  worked  in  Montre- 
al," The  Journal  of  Canadian  Art  History,  1981,  vol.  V,  no.  2,  120-1. 

92.  Schroeder  was  listed  as  being  in  New  York  Cm  in  1820  in  the  William  A.  Mercein  di- 
rectory, and  in  1826  and  1829  was  listed  as  a  miniaturist  at  isS  Broadway  in  New  Yoik.ia  Min- 
erve,  Montreal,  Quebec,  6  Januan-  1831.  It  is  this  notice  that  states  Schroeder  was  a  native  of 
Hanau. 

93.  See  J.  Russell  Harper,  Painting  m  Canada,  (University  of  Toronto  Press,  1966),  117. 
One  of  these  engravings  by  William  Leney  after  Schroeder,  at  the  McCord  Museum  of  Cana- 
dian History  in  Montreal,  reads  lower  left:  "Scroeder  delt"  and  lower  right:  "Leney  fet." 

94.  See  Marion  Con\-erse  Bright,  comp..  Early  Georgia  Portraits,  i^is-iS-'o,  National  Soci- 
ety of  the  Colonial  Dames  of  .America  in  the  State  of  Georgia.  (Athens:  University  of  Georgia 
Press,  197s),  2-'o,  288,  tor  reproductions  of  Schroeder  miniatures  of  Nathaniel  A.  Adams 


ITINER.ANT    ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


(1800-46)  and  James  McHenry  (1788-1826).  See  also  A/i  Exhibition  of  Miniatures  Owned  in 
South  Carolina  and  Miniatures  of  South  Carolinians  Owned  Elsewhere  Painted  before  the  Year 
1S60  (Charleston.  S.C.:  Carolina  Art  Association.  Gibbes  Memorial  Art  Gallery,  1936)  tor 
miniatures  of  Alexander  Gillon.  William  Lennox  Kirkland.  and  Mr.  Thomson.  The  Gillon 
and  the  Kirkland  miniatures  contamed  the  backing  cards  with  Schroeder's  name  in  1936. 
These  three  miniatures  are  recorded  at  the  Frick  Art  Reference  Librar)',  New  York.  N.  Y. 

Portrait  miniatures  were  treasured  in  the  American  south  during  the  late  eighteenth  centu- 
ry and  early  nineteenth  century,  as  they  were  elsewhere.  However,  because  of  the  high  humidi- 
tv,  the  survival  rate  has  been  less.  To  understand  the  importance  and  popularity  of  portrait 
miniatures,  see  the  well-illustrated  catalog  by  Martha  R.  Severens,  The  Miniature  Portrait  Col- 
lection of  the  Carolina  Art  Association,  (Charleston,  S.  C:  Carolina  Art  Association,  Gibbes  Art 
Gallery,  1984).  For  illustrations  of  portrait  miniatures  being  worn  as  they  were  intended  during 
this  period,  see  M.  J.  Gibbs,  "Precious  Artifacts:  Women's  Jewelry  in  the  Chesapeake, 
i7'iO-i7')<),"  Journal  of  Early  Southern  Decorative  Arts.  May  198^,  52.  68,  73-74. 

95.  See  Goodenough,  Memoirs  of  the  Leonard.  Thompson  and  Haskell  Families.  45,  51.  Spe- 
cial thanks  to  Mrs.  Richard  M.  Leonard  for  her  invaluable  assistance  with  James  Manning 
Leonard. 

96.  Ihid..  51;  According  to  Man.'  Jean  Blasdale.  Artists  of  New  Bedford:  A  Biogi-aphical  Du- 
tionan.  in  the  Old  Colony  Gazette.  New  Bedford,  8  Februan,-  1811,  James  M.  Leonard  adver- 
tised .IS  a  "portrait  painter"(New  Bedford,  Mass.:  Published  at  the  New  Bedford  Whaling  Mu- 
seum bv  the  Old  Dartmouth  Historical  Society.  1990).  i;o-i.  This  is  one  of  the  few  printed 
references  to  Leonard. 

97.  Norfolk  &  Portsmouth  Herald,  Virginia,  31  Januan,'  1816. 

98.  Virginia  Herald.  Fredericksburg,  14  December  1816,  8  .March  1817,  and  21  January  1818. 
See  also  Simmons,  "i8th  and  19th  Century  Artists  Active  in  the  Lower  Shenandoah  Valley," 
86. 

99.  I'irginta  Herald.  Fredericksburg.  ;i  Januar}'  1818. 

100.  Alexandria  Herald  30  November  1818;  Alexandria  Gazette  C~  Daily  Advertiser.  8  De- 
cember 1818,  20  January  1819. 

loi.  Patty  Willis.  "Jefferson  County  Portraits  and  Portrait  Painters,"  Magazine  of  the  Jeffer- 
son County  (West  Virginia)  Historical  Society.  6  (December  1940),  21-39. 

102.  Manning  Leonard,  Memorial:  Genealogical.  Historical  C  Biographical  of  Solomon 
Leonard  233.  Full  citations  for  the  two  genealogies  are  in  notes  50  and  S2. 

103.  For  a  discussion  of  itmetant  artists  who  became  well-known  pamtets,  see  Leah  Lipton, 
"William  Dunlap,  Samuel  F.  B.  Morse,  John  Wesley  Jarvis,  and  Chester  Harding:  Their  Ca- 
reers as  Itinerant  Portrait  Painters,"  American  Art  Journal.  Summer  1981,  34-50.  For  Charles 
Loring  Elliott,  see  Groce  and  Wallace.  Dictionary  of  Artists  in  America.  210.  For  the  most  re- 
cent research  about  Ralph  Earl,  see  Elizabeth  Mankin  Kornhauser,  et  al.  Ralph  Earl:  The  Face 
of  the  Young  Republic  CHew  Haven,  Conn.:  Yale  University  Press,  1991)  and  Elizabeth  Mankin 
Kornhauser,  Ralph  Earl  as  an  Itinerant  .Artist:  Pattern  of  Patronage,"  in  Benes,  ed..  Itinerancy' 
in  New  England  and  Neiv  York.  1^2-89. 

104.  Neil  Harris.  The  Artist  in  American  Society:  the  Formative  Years  1-00-1S60.  (New  \'ork: 
Cieorge  Braziller.  1966).  24S. 

1  should  like  to  thank  the  staff  of  the  Museum  of  Early  Southern  Decorative  .•Xrts  for  their 
suppott  of  this  pro|ect.  Without  access  to  the  newspaper  transcriptions  at  the  MESDA  Re- 
search Center,  a  study  like  this  one  would  have  been  impossible. 

The  staff  of  the  Libfar\'  of  the  National  Museum  of  American  An  and  the  National  Por- 


40  JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    199^ 


trait  Gillen-  h.is  been  invjtkthly  helpful  with  my  research,  especially  Cecilia  Chin  and  Pat  Lv- 
nagh.  At  the  Catalog  of  American  Portraits,  the  National  Portrait  Gallery,  Linda  Thrift,  Debo- 
rah Sisum,  and  Patricia  Svoboda  have  assisted  greatly  in  locating  portraits.  The  Inventory  of 
American  Paintings  and  Sculpture,  National  Museum  of  American  Art,  has  also  been  most 
helpful.  These  research  facilities  are  all  part  of  the  Smithsonian  Institution,  Washington.  D.  C. 

Special  thanks  are  due  to  the  staff  of  the  Maryland  Historical  Socier>'  for  use  of  the  J.  Hall 
Pleasants  "Studies  in  Maryland  Painting  files,"  and  also  to  the  staff  members  of  the  Library 
and  the  Manuscript  collection.  In  Alexandria,  the  staff  of  the  Lloyd  House  Library  of  Virginia 
History  and  Genealogy  has  been  gracious  and  efficient  with  my  tequests,  especially  Sandra 
O'Keefe,  Joyce  McMullin,  Joan  Astorga  and  former  staff  members  Yvonne  Carignan  and  T. 
Michael  Miller.  My  gratitude  to  all. 

I  should  also  like  to  acknowledge  my  Canadian  colleagues,  Mary  Allodi.  Lydia  Foy,  Con- 
rad Graham,  and  Nicole  Vallieres,  for  their  assistance  with  Cromwell's  and  Schroeder's  so- 
journs in  Canada. 


ITINERANT   ARTISTS    OF    FAIRFAX    STREET,    ALEXANDRIA 


Furniture  of  the  North  Carolina 

Roanoke  River  Basin  in  the  Collection 

of  Historic  Hope  Foundation 


JOHN     BIVINS,    JR. 


IN  1966,  Historic  Hope  Foundation  acquired  the  Bertie  County, 
North  CaroUna,  manor  of  David  Stone  (1770-1818).  A  five-bay 
two-story  frame  house  with  a  two-story  pedimented  portico 
over  a  fiill  basement,  Hope  Plantation  was  constructed  between  1796 
and  1803  (fig.  i).  The  house  was  buih  on  a  tract  of  1,050  acres  given 
to  Stone  in  1793  by  his  father,  Zedekiah  Stone,  a  native  of  Massachu- 
setts who  emigrated  to  North  CaroHna  in  the  1760s.  David  Stone 
eventually  expanded  his  land  holdings  to  over  8,000  acres;  he  owned 
128  slaves  at  the  time  of  his  death.  Educated  at  Princeton,  Stone  was 
admitted  to  the  bar  in  1790,  and  dedicated  much  of  his  energies  to 
public  service,  serving  as  a  superior  court  judge,  a  member  of  the 
North  Carolina  General  Assembly,  and  a  member  of  the  United 
States  Congress  in  both  the  House  and  the  Senate.  He  was  governor 
of  North  Carolina  from  1808  to  1810.' 

Stone's  interest  in  diverse  subjects  was  reflected  in  his  enormous 
library  of  1,499  volumes,  contained  in  bookshelves  with  glazed  doors 
built  into  his  second-floor  study.  Architecture  obviously  was  one  of 
Stone's  avid  pursuits.  His  house  follows  published  designs  of  eigh- 
teenth-century British  adaptations  of  classical  urban  Italian  villas  in 
the  style  of  Palladio,  even  to  the  plan  of  the  structure.  The  first-floor 
entry,  for  example,  opens  not  upon  the  usual  southern  symmetrical 


42 


I.  Hope  Pliintation.  Berne  County,  North  Giroliiia,  iy6-iSo^.  .MRf-ij,6jj. 


center  passage,  but  rather  a  pair  of  saloons.  The  most  formal  rooms, 
including  the  library,  were  situated  on  the  second  floor,  which  is 
dominated  by  a  twenty  by  thirty-foot  drawing  room  that  which 
opens  onto  the  second-floor  porch.  Such  urban  sophistication  of 
plan  was  not  common  in  the  mid-South.  Other  than  the  sixteen  by 
twenty-inch  lights  of  the  window  sash,  little  of  the  exterior  of  Hope 
reveals  the  early  nineteenth-century  date  of  the  building.  The  interi- 
or, however,  is  largely  finished  in  the  neoclassical  style  in  regard  to 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


2.  The  Kiiig-Biizemore  House,  Bertie  County.  North  Carolina,  i~6^.  Historic 
Hope  Foundation  (HHI)  photograph. 

both  architectural  treatment — door  and  window  architraves,  cor- 
nices, chair  rails,  bases,  and  mantels — as  well  as  the  extensive  em- 
ployment of-  grained  surfaces. 

In  addition,  the  Hope  Plantation  complex  now  includes  a  1763 
brick-ended  three-bay  gambrel-roof  house  built  in  Bertie  Count)'  by 
William  King;  the  structure,  known  as  the  King-Basemore  House, 
has  been  moved  to  a  site  adjacent  to  Hope  and  restored  (fig.  2). 
Brick-ended  frame  dwellings  are  not  uncommon  in  both  southeast- 
ern Virginia  and  northeastern  North  Carolina,  and  they  occur  in 


JOURNAL   OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATI\'E   ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


smaller  numbers  as  far  north  as  southern  New  England.  In  the  lower 
Chesapeake,  they  made  their  appearance  at  least  as  early  as  the 
174OS.  The  King  house  is  the  only  such  structure  serving  as  a  house 
museum  in  North  Carolina,  adding  another  architectural  and  socio- 
historical  dimension  to  the  interpretation  oi  Hope  Plantation.  The 
two  dwellings  together  contain  a  significant  amount  of  furniture 
produced  in  southeastern  Virginia  and  in  the  Albemarle  region 
which  comprises  the  northeastern  sector  oi  North  Carolina.  Particu- 
larly significant  is  the  Foundation's  collection  of  furniture  made  in 
the  nearby  Roanoke  River  basin;  over  sixty  pieces  in  the  collection, 
ranging  from  simple  vernacular  work  to  sophisticated  urban  styles, 
are  attributable  to  this  region.  About  half  of  Historic  Hope  Founda- 
tion's Roanoke  River  basin  furniture,  perhaps  the  most  representa- 
tive pieces,  are  illustrated  here;  nine  of  them,  figures  17,  19  to  24,  30, 
and  31  were  published  previously  by  MESDA  in  the  1988  monograph 
Furniture  of  Coastal  North  Carolina  iyoo-1820.- 

Establishing  the  specific  boundaries  ot  the  Roanoke  basin  in 
terms  of  identifiable  furniture  production  is  less  a  matter  of  tracing 
the  meandering  route  of  the  river  itself  than  understanding  the  man- 
ner in  which  the  river's  watershed  was  settled  (fig.  3).  Within  twent}'- 
five  miles  of  its  mouth  on  the  Albemarle  Sound,  just  southwest  oi 
Edenton,  the  Roanoke  expands  into  an  extensive,  marshy  network 
of  savannahs.  Although  surrounded  by  rich  loamy  soil  well  suited  to 
agriculture,  this  lower  expanse  of  the  river  was  by  no  means  counted 
the  most  habitable,  h  was  the  upper  reaches  of  the  river,  just  above 
the  midpoint  of  its  course  from  the  Virginia  line  to  the  Sound,  that 
afforded  the  most  pleasant  prospects  to  settlers.  A  huge  bend  in  the 
river  southeast  of  the  small  town  of  Halifax  proved  to  have  the  rich- 
est soil  in  the  region.  At  this  point  the  river  traversed  the  three  coun- 
ties with  the  greatest  degree  of  agricultural  wealth  at  the  end  of 
North  Carolina's  colonial  period:  Bertie,  Northampton,  and  Halifax. 
Bordering  these  three  counties,  and  enjoying  somewhat  less  of  the 
highly  arable  soil  of  the  river's  low  ground,  Hertford  and  Edge- 
combe counties  also  developed  a  substantial  planter  class  before  the 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


3-  The  Roanoke  River 
basin  area,  from  The  State 
of  North  Carohna  from 
the  Best  Authorities  by 
Samuel  Lewis,  c.  1^94  (en- 
graved by  Vallance). 
Philadelphia:  Carey's  Edi- 
tion, Gnrhrie's  Geography, 
May  I,  i-9<;.  The  loeatton 
of  Hope  Plantation  is  indi- 
eated  by  an  arrow.  MRF- 
2 1  OS. 


middle  of  the  eighteenth  century.  Although  the  three  counties  bor- 
dering the  river  saw  the  strongest  growth  ot  trades  before  the  end  ot 
the  eighteenth  century,  all  five  counties  together  developed  an  im- 
pressive seedbed  ot  cabinetmaking  by  the  1760s.  This  had  little  or 
nothing  to  do  with  the  development  ol  towns  in  the  region,  for  even 
bv  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  central  and  western  por- 
tions of  the  Albemarle  region  were  characterized  more  by  the  lack  of 
urban  centers  than  the  presence  ol  them. 

The  region  was  densely  populated  by  planters  who,  compared  to 
the  tobacco  aristocracy  of  Virginia,  would  have  been  considered 
"middling."  The  upper  Roanoke  basin  was  settled  during  the  first 
quarter  of  the  eighteenth  century,  and  b\'  the  end  of  the  colonial  pe- 
riod second-  and  third-generation  descendants  had  developed  "many 


46 


JOURNAL  OF  EARLY  SOUTHERN  DECORATIVE  ARTS 


S  U  W  .VI  E  R  1996 


elegant  seats  ...  on  the  margin  of  the  Roanoke,"  according  to  the 
New  England  visitor  Elkanah  Watson.  Watson,  an  educated  and  so- 
phisticated world  traveler,  had  no  political  axes  to  grind  in  North 
Carolina,  and  his  comment  that  "the  society"  of  the  upper  Roanoke 
was  "considered  among  the  most  polished  and  cultivated  in  the 
State"  was  no  mere  hyperbole.'  The  most  significant  ties  of  com- 
merce this  region  possessed  lay  far  less  in  the  tortuous  and  lengthy 
navigation  from  the  mouth  ot  the  river  and  through  the  sounds  and 
Ocracoke  inlet  to  the  Atlantic  than  in  overland  routes  to  Virginia. 
Norfolk  was  the  keystone  of  this  trade,  and  it  profited  handsomely 
from  the  produce  of  the  upper  Roanoke  basin  that  traversed  both 
the  eastern  and  western  routes  around  the  massive  Great  Dismal 
Swamp. 

Most  importantly,  it  was  largely  through  these  routes  of  com- 
merce that  the  Roanoke  basin  became  increasingly  attractive  to  indi- 
viduals who  by  the  early  nineteenth  century  were  perceived  by  one 
frustrated  census-taker  to  be  "Summer  Agricultorists  and  Winter 
Mechanicks."^  These  were  farmer-artisans,  men  enticed  to  the  region 
not  only  by  the  presence  of  trade  patronage,  but  also  by  a  vast 
amount  of  cheap  acreage  that  represented  the  likeliest  means  to  for- 
tune. Typical  of  these  was  Thomas  Sharrock,  who  in  1756  had  been 
apprenticed  to  Richard  Taylor  of  Norfolk  to  "Learn  the  Trade  of  a 
Carpenter  &  Joiner."  Sharrock  completed  his  indenture  in  1762,  and 
shortly  thereafter  was  in  Northampton  Count)',  where  by  1765  he 
had  acquired  a  modest  parcel  of  land  on  a  tributary  of  the  Roanoke 
and  married  Bathsheba  Daughtry,  the  daughter  of  a  prominent 
Quaker  who  also  was  a  cabinetmaker.  Of  the  eleven  sons  born  to 
this  couple,  at  least  six  joined  their  lather  in  the  trade.  Sharrock  en- 
joyed extensive  patronage  amongst  the  gentry  of  the  area,  not  the 
least  of  whom  was  David  Stone.  Before  his  death  in  1802,  Sharrock 
had  moved  to  Bertie  County,  where  he  still  operated  a  flourishing 
cabinet  trade.  The  contents  of  his  shop  included  an  extensive  listing 
ol  hand  tools,  a  lathe,  four  workbenches,  hardware,  and  both  tools 
and  materials  lor  carrying  on,  in  addition  to  cabinetmaking,  house 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


47 


joiner's  work  and  the  services  of  a  wheelwright.  The  balance  of  his 
trade  inventory  was  that  oi  a  small  planter,  including  four  slaves, 
horses,  cattle,  sheep,  hogs,  and  the  produce  of  his  fields.' 

The  essentially  rural  nature  of  the  Roanoke  River  basin  that  en- 
couraged the  growth  of  a  farmer-artisan  class  by  no  means  dictated 
the  production  oi  simple  rural  srv'les.  The  planters  oi  the  region  not 
only  understood  urban  fashion,  they  could  afford  it,  and  the  artisans 
who  emigrated  to  the  region  were  largely  conversant  in  such  styles. 
During  the  1765-1800  period,  which  saw  the  most  significant 
growth  of  the  region,  over  130  cabinetmakers  plied  their  trade  be- 
tween Pasquotank  and  Warren  counties.  During  this  time  over  thir- 
ty oi  them,  not  counting  apprentices,  were  working  in  the  five  coun- 
ties that  converged  at  the  great  bend  oi  the  Roanoke  River.  Most  of 
these  cabinetmakers  were  located  within  a  fifteen-mile  radius  center- 
ing on  the  river  where  it  defines  the  southeastern  corner  ot  Halifax 
County.  This  density  oi  artisans  in  a  rural  area  is  comparable  to  ur- 
ban regions  of  the  lower  Chesapeake.  Between  1745  and  1775,  for  ex- 
ample, twentv-eight  cabinetmakers  were  known  to  have  been  work- 
ing in  Norfolk  and  Princess  Anne  counties  in  Virginia.' 

In  terms  of  surviving  furniture,  it  is  evident  that  the  cabinetmak- 
ing  trade  in  the  Roanoke  basin  was  strongest  during  the  last  decade 
of  the  colonial  period  and  the  last  quarter  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
but  there  is  substantial  evidence  of  furniture  production  in  the  re- 
gion before  1750.  Throughout  the  eighteenth  century,  cabinetmakers 
in  the  region,  like  Thomas  Sharrock,  tended  to  be  diversified.  A 
large  percentage  of  them  owned  tools  such  as  flooring  dogs  and 
framing  squares,  indicating  that  they  not  only  offered  the  standard 
production  of  rural  shop  joiners  such  as  sash,  wainscot,  and  doors, 
but  also  engaged  directly  in  the  building  trades.  Most  of  them 
owned  lathes,  and  these  were  put  to  use  not  only  for  table  legs,  bed 
posts,  and  the  posts  and  base  rounds  of  chairs,  but  also  balusters  and 
newels. 

The  considerable  emphasis  upon  regional  furniture  in  the  collec- 
tion at  Hope  Plantation  is  not  merely  the  result  of  convenient  local 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


purchases,  but  instead  represents  a  concentrated  effort  on  the  part  ot 
Historic  Hope  Foundation  to  present  its  buildings  in  the  manner  in 
which  they  would  have  been  seen  during  their  time.  This  philoso- 
phy oi"  interpretation  therefore  brought  about  the  long-standing  but 
difficult  goal  of  locating  and  acquiring  furniture  that  most  realisti- 
cally represents  the  type  of  work  that  David  Stone  would  have  com- 
missioned from  artisans  working  in  the  region  where  he  lived. 

Stone  was  familiar  with  a  broad  range  of  early  nineteenth-century 
fashions,  originating  from  New  England  to  the  Chowan  basin  and 
west  to  Raleigh.  He  owned  Massachusetts  furniture,  no  doubt  im- 
ported by  Edenton  merchants,  since  that  small  port  was  scarcely 
more  than  twent)'  miles  east  of  the  plantation.  About  the  same  dis- 
tance to  the  northwest  of  Stone's  manor,  however,  lay  the  center  of 
the  most  diverse  cabinetmaking  skills  in  the  state  during  the  early  fe 

nineteenth  centurv.  Between  1800  and  1810,  at  least  twenty-six  cabi- 
netmakers  worked  in  the  Roanoke  River  basin  counties  of  Halifax,  ^ 

Bertie,  Hertford,  and  Northampton,  all  readily  accessible  to  David  S 

Stone.  During  the  same  period,  Chowan  County,  where  Edenton  t> 

was  located,  supported  no  more  than  a  dozen  cabinetmaking  shops.  '^ 

The  per  capita  wealth  of  the  Roanoke  planters  ensured  that  the  pro-  g 

duction  of  Roanoke  basin  cabinet  shops  was  not  onh'  substantial,  ^ 

but  among  the  most  fashionable  of  the  Lower  Chesapeake.  Individ-  o 

uals  like  Stone  therefore  played  an  important  role  in  the  strength  of  >- 

the  Roanoke  River  basin  school  of  cabinetmaking,  which  is  precisely  < 

why  the  presence  of  representative  work  from  this  region  is  deemed  u, 

critical  to  realistic  interpretation  at  Hope.  For  that  reason,  it  seems  „ 

appropriate  to  present  a  sampling  of  Historic  Hope's  collection  here.  3 


The  ubiquitous  "six-board "  chest  was  the  standard  production  of 
both  house  joiners  and  "shop  joiners"  or  cabinetmakers  in  the  seven- 
teenth and  eighteenth  century.  In  the  form  of  its  base,  one  chest  at 
Hope  (fig.  4)  represents  the  development  of  a  regional  style  that  very 
likely  was  present  in  both  the  Chowan  and  Roanoke  river  basins 
shortly  after  1700.  The  bottom  of  the  chest  is  notched  to  lit  around 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER 


49 


the  sides,  and  its  projecting  portions  run  with  a  cyma  molding.  The 
sides  (fig.  4a)  ,  which  are  butt-jointed  to  the  front  and  back,  are  sim- 
ilarly notched  in  order  to  provide  a  projecting  tront  toot  (the  right 
foot  is  split)  that  is  the  equivalent  oi  an  architectural  corbel,  cut  with 
a  simple  ovolo  and  cyma  profile.  This  type  of  corbelled  base,  which 
has  no  known  stylistic  parallel  north  ol  the  Albemarle  region,  occurs 
on  chests  found  in  both  Gates  and  Bertie  counties.  This  example  has 
a  history  of  descent  in  the  Speight  himily,  which  in  fact  lived  in  both 
counties.  The  top  ot  this  chest  is  attached  with  snipe  hinges;  the  use 
of  a  heavy  thumb  molding  only  at  the  front  edge  is  an  early  detail. 


4.  Chest.  Bertie  Couiit}'.  Niirth  Ciiwliiui.  l~20-l-'40.  yellow  pine  throughout.  HO.-i 
jj'-i".  W'OA  >'0^.s'",  I >().-{  n''s".  HHI  accession  QS. 4.10.  Unless  otherwise  tioted, 
photographs  of  furniture  are  hy  David  Weshrook. 


4a.  Side  view  of  figure  4. 


50 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


5.  Chest,  western  Bertie  County,  17^0-1740,  yellow  pine  throughout.  HoA  24^3", 
WOA  ^f/a  ",  DOA  17V2  ".  HHF  accession  92.14.1. 


Most  such  pine  chests  were  painted;  this  piece  has  a  Hght  gray  or 
"stone"  coating  probably  dating  from  the  early  nineteenth  century. 

Only  slightly  later  than  the  preceding  example,  the  chest  shown 
in  figure  5  has  rabbeted  rather  than  butt-jointed  front  and  rear 
boards.  Unlike  New  England  examples,  the  bottom  is  exposed,  and 
therefore  represents  a  simplified  version  of  the  corbelled  bases  with 
extended  bottom  boards  like  that  on  the  previous  chest.  The  consid- 
erable width  of-  this  chest,  over  four  and  one-half  feet,  is  not  unusual 
tor  the  region. 

One  bedstead,  the  only  piece  of  furniture  illustrated  here  that 
cannot  be  attributed  with  certainry  to  the  Roanoke  River  basin,  nev- 
ertheless represents  the  sort  that  could  have  seen  use  in  a  wealthy 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


6.  Bed.  southern  coanal planu  i-oo-i^^).  bhuk  ivabutt  throughoitt.  HOA  -jfl'", 
W'oA  sV/ii-".  l-OA  T'Ad".  HHF accession  S6.^4.i. 


JOURNAL  OF  EARLY  SOUTHERN  D  E  C  O  R  A  T  I  \' E  ARTS 


SUMMER  1996 


Roanoke  basin  household  during  the 
first  quarter  of  the  eighteenth  century 
(fig.  6).  Very  hkely  representing  the  ear- 
Hest  known  American  tall-post  bed, 
both  the  height  of  the  posts — originally 
over  seven  feet — and  the  use  of  walnut 
throughout  suggest  a  southern  origin, 
possibly  tidewater  Virginia  or  the  North 
Carolina  Albemarle."  The  early  date  of 
this  bed  is  evident  in  the  style  of  the 
post  turnings  (fig.  6a),  which  amalga- 
mate classical  vase  and  scotia  turnings 
with  quasi-architectural  compresse  balls 
that  reflect  Mannerist  turnings  of  the 
seventeenth  century.  The  double  tier  of 
vases,  separated  by  a  series  of  com- 
pressed balls,  sharp-edged  fillets,  and 
neck  turnings,  is  a  stylistic  composition 
parallel  to  the  back-stile  turnings  of  late 
seventeenth-  and  early  eighteenth-cen- 
tury caned  and  leather-back  chairs  from 
both  Britain  and  northern  urban  cen- 
ters, particularly  Boston  and  New  York." 
Although  the  largely  undisturbed 
surfaces  of  this  bed  show  clear  evidence 
of-  the  turner's  gouge,  the  finish  and  at- 
tention to  detail  is  exceptional.  The 
outer  corners  of  all  the  rails  are  struck 
with  ovolo  moldings  (fig.  6b),  as  are  the 

edges  of-  the  triangular  headboard.  The  inner  corners  of  the  rails  are 
chamfered.  The  bed  originally  was  held  together  only  by  its  un- 
pinned mortise-and-tenon  joints  and  the  roping;  bed  bolts  were 
added  in  the  early  nineteenth  century.  The  footboard  appears  to  be 
an  early  addition,  but  its  mortises  have  not  been  compared  with 


6a.  Detail  of  upper  post  of  figure  6. 
6b.  Detail  of  leg  and  foot  of  figure  6. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


-].  Dining  table,  Roanoke  River  basin,  1750-1790,  walnut  with  yelloiv  pine  inner 
frame  and  ash  fly  frames.  HOA  2jVi6",  WOA  48  Via",  DOA  i6'Vib".  HHF  accession 
90.2.23. 


those  of  the  headboard  tor  verification.  The  posts  have  lost  eight  to 
twelve  inches  01"  height  at  the  top. 

Dining  tables,  often  described  as  "square"  in  early  probate  inven- 
tories owing  to  their  squared  rather  than  rounded  leaves,  generally 
were  made  in  relatively  standard  sizes;  the  table  shown  in  figure  7 
has  an  open  length  ot  four  feet.  Tables  with  turned  legs  and  "round" 
feet,  as  they  were  called  in  the  eighteenth  century,  began  to  appear 
in  southeastern  Virginia  during  the  first  quarter  of  the  century. 
Many  of  the  earlier  examples  had  round  or  oval  tops,  a  sr\'listic  con- 
tinuation of  the  form  of  the  earlier  gateleg  table,  but  by  the  1730s 
most  of  them  were  fitted  with  rectangular  tops.  This  better  suited 


JOURN.AL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


dining  needs  in  large  households,  where  matched  sets  of  "square" 
dining  tables  were  drawn  together.  Also  by  the  1730s,  turned  rather 
than  carved  teet  became  the  norm  in  the  lower  Chesapeake.  With 
turned  feet  over  tall  coved  discs,  the  teet  of  this  table  are  stylistically 
related  to  Williamsburg  work  associated  with  the  Anthony  Hay 
shop,  although  the  table  is  thought  to  have  been  made  in  Halifax  or 
Northampton  Count)'.  The  hinge  segments  of  the  flv  frames  are  cut 
with  a  radius,  unlike  the  flat  hinge  segments  seen  on  many  Virginia 
tables.  Tables  such  as  this  example  are  difficult  to  date.  While  they 
were  introduced  early,  the  conservative  tastes  ol  the  lower  Chesa- 
peake assured  the  long  persistence  of  the  Baroque  style,  reflected  in 
the  turned-leg,  turned  foot  leg  form. 

The  apparent  simplicity  ot  the  vernacular  British  style  of  lower 
Chesapeake  chairs  is  deceiving,  since  the  understated  grace  ot  these 
pieces  is  the  result  of  considerable  skill  on  the  part  of  their  makers. 
Proportions,  angles,  curves,  and  surface  shaping  required  subtle  inte- 
gration lor  a  successful  product.  Construction  is  lar  from  simple, 
since  virtually  all  of  the  joinery,  with  the  exception  of  the  front  rails, 
had  to  be  fitted  on  a  bias.  Chair  construction  depended  heavily 
upon  pattern  work,  such  as  the  "parcel  Joiners  patterns"  inventoried 
in  the  shop  of  Northampton  Count)'  cabinetmaker  Thomas  White, 
who  also  owned  an  "Iron  Chear  Clamp"  which  Thomas  Sharrock's 
son  George  bought  tor  £1.10.0  in  the  1789  sale.'  Such  shop  patterns 
were  used  for  laying  out  crests,  splats,  splat  shoes,  and  both  the  front 
and  side  profiles  ol  back  stiles,  which  is  precisely  why  chairs  must  be 
studied  from  every  side  il  associative  study  is  the  object. 

Like  the  many  turned-leg,  turned-loot  dining  tables  produced  in 
the  Roanoke  basin,  side  chairs  can  be  very  difficult  to  date  since  ear- 
ly styles  persisted  until  near  the  end  of  the  century  in  this  somewhat 
isolated  region.  Seating  furniture  in  the  Chinese  taste — that  is,  with 
square  legs  and  a  stretcher  between  the  front  legs — was  common  in 
Britain  by  the  1740s,  and  very  likely  was  produced  at  least  by  the 
mid-i730s.  Every  aspect  of  such  chairs  was  an  adaptation  of  oriental 
design,  including,  on  the  chair  in  figure  8,  the  shape  of  the  crest  and 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


8.  Side  chair,  one  of  an  existing  pair,  Halifax  County,  ij^o—go,  walnut  with  yel- 
low pine  slip  seat.  HOA  s6y8,  K'OA  i^'Vio,  DOA  i8'/2.  HHF  accession  90.2.10. 

8a.  Side  view  of  figure  8. 

8b.  Rear  view  of  figure  8. 


the  profile  of  the  splat.  The  lobate  piercings  are  chronologically  asso- 
ciated with  the  reign  of  George  II  (1727-1760).  Like  virtually  all 
Roanoke  basin  chairs,  this  pair  is  oi  walnut,  and  the  pinned  mortise- 
and-tenon  joints  ot  the  seat  frame  are  not  reinforced  with  glue 
blocks.  A  vernacular  approach  to  construction  is  found  in  the  join- 
ery of  the  splat  and  shoe  (fig.  8a),  where  the  splat  is  tenoned  directly 
to  the  seat  rail  and  the  shoe  fitted  around  it,  a  solution  normally  ap- 


56 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


plied  to  chairs  made  with  upholstery  "stuffed  over  the  rails"  rather 
than  attached  to  a  "loose  seat'  such  as  this  example  has.'"  The  chair 
shown  in  figure  9  has  its  splat  conventionally  seated  into  the  shoe, 
and  the  splat  tenons  are  not  pinned  at  top  and  bottom  in  the  man- 
ner of  the  previous  example  (fig.  9a).  Demonstrating  a  British  stylis- 
tic tradition  that  also  occurs  in  parts  of  New  England,  in  New  York 
City,  and  in  southeastern  Virginia,  the  front  profile  of  the  rear  legs 
oi"  this  chair  (fig.  9b)  makes  a  break  below  the  seat,  continuing  in  a 


9.  Side  chair.  Roanoke  River  basbu  i-^<;o-i^qo.  walnut  witi)  yellow  pine  slip 
seats.  H(M  ,'-\s",  U'o.-J  ig'-, ",  DO.A  iS'a".  HHF accession  —.1.1. 
9a.  Side  view  of  figure  g. 
9b.  Rear  view  of  figure  9. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


10.  Side  chair,  Bertie 
County,  I7S0-I790, 
ivalniit  witi)  yellow 
pine  slip  seat,  HUA 
}7'A",  \'i'OA  21'^' /lb", 
no  A  ig".  HHh  acces- 
sion So.  2. 1. 


straight  line  to  the  floor.  The  same  is  true  of 
the  rear  legs  of  the  previous  chair  (fig.  8b). 

With  the  somewhat  less  successful  flow  of 
its  crest  and  back  stiles,  a  similar  chair  never- 
theless was  finished  with  the  full  range  of  de- 
tails that  one  might  expect  to  find  on  a 
Roanoke  basin  chair  (fig.  10).  Like  the  previ- 
ous chair,  the  seat  rails  and  front  legs  are  run 
with  an  ovolo  molding,  but  here  the  same 
details  are  carried  to  the  outside  edges  oi  the 
stretchers  as  well.  The  inner  edges  of  the 
back  stiles,  bottom  of  the  crest,  and  outer 
edges  of  the  splat  are  visually  integrated  with 
a  flush  bead.  Also  occurring  on  tables  of  the 
region,  this  extensive  beading  is  found  as 
well  on  furniture  made  in  Williamsburg  and 
southside  Virginia.  A  simple  but  effective 
detail,  this  bead  added  to  the  expense  of  the 
chair  since  it  had  to  be  sunk  with  a  scratch- 
stock  rather  than  run  with  a  plane,  a  time- 
consuming  task.  Rpical  of  many  Roanoke 
basin  chairs,  the  splat  shoe  overhangs  the 
front  of  the  rear  seat  rail,  and  in  this  instance — not  usual  to  the 
area — is  supported  by  glue  blocks." 

Standard  corner  chairs  more  often  than  not  were  listed  as  "smok- 
ing chairs"  in  the  probate  inventories  of  southeastern  Virginia  and 
northeastern  North  Carolina.  This  example  (fig.  11),  however,  would 
have  qualified  as  a  "close  stool  corner  chair,"  a  description  found  in 
some  southern  coastal  inventories.  This  example  has  deeply  shaped 
"vanitv"  seat  rails  that  are  not  usual  to  North  Carolina  corner  chairs. 
The  turned  legs  are  also  unusual  for  the  region;  they  are  a  feature 
more  expected  of  similar  chairs  made  in  northern  New  England. 
Like  several  other  corner  chairs  with  a  Halifax  County  history,  how- 
ever, this  example  has  features  associated  with  a  Virginia  chairmak- 
ing  tradition  extending  from  Williamsburg  to  Petersburg.   Rather 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


than  a  coved  shoe,  this  chair  has  flat  strips  notched  to  fit  around  the 
splats.  A  detail  common  to  close-stool  chairs  attributed  to  Peter 
Scott  ot  Williamsburg  is  the  lack  of  a  rabbet  in  the  front  rails  for  the 
slip  seat.  This  allowed  the  seat  to  be  readily  removed,  no  doubt  a 
great  convenience  in  a  dark  bedchamber.  The  joinery  of  the  chair  is 
otherwise  conventional  for  the  Roanoke  basin;  the  arm  halves,  for 
example,  join  in  the  center  with  a  shiplap  held  together  by  the  tenon 
of  the  rear  arm  support. 

A  compelling  mystery  in  the  study  of  American  furniture  forms  is 
the  cellaret,  which  in  the  eighteenth  century  was  variously  described 
as  a  case  of  bottles,  brandy  case,  and  gin  case,  the  last  no  doubt  since 
virtually  all  of  them  were  partitioned  to  fit  mold-blown  tapering 
square  Dutch  gin  bottles,  which  could  be  used  to  store  any  sort  of 
spirits.  The  introduction  of  the  case  of 
bottles  on  stand  indeed  appears  to  have 
depended  upon  the  1760s  appearance  of 
these  gin  bottles  in  the  transatlantic 
trade.  The  mystery  lies  in  the  origin  of 
this  form,  that  is,  a  partitioned  case 
loose-fitted  to  a  frame  so  that  the  case 
readily  could  be  transported  about  the 
house.  Such  bottle  cases  were  made  in 
southeastern  Virginia,  where  the  earliest 
known  example  indeed  was  produced, 
but  the  largest  occurrence  of  the  form  is 
in  the  Roanoke  River  basin  of  Carolina. 
In  North  Carolina,  no  cellarets  have  been 
found  that  can  be  attributed  to  the 
Chowan  River  basin,  of  which  Edenton 
was  the  cultural  hub.  They  do  occur  in 
backcountry  North  Carolina  and  as  far 
west  as  middle  Tennessee;  in  both  areas, 
the  presence  of  the  form  almost  certainly 
represented  transmission  via  migration 
from  the  Roanoke  basin  and  southside 


II.  Corner  chair,  Halifax  County,  1 7^0-1 '■QO, 
ivalnut  with  yellow  pine  rear  seat  supports.  HOA 
ji!s",  \\'OA2)".  H HI-  accession  ''4.4.4. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


12.  Bottle  case.  Roatiokc  Riivr  hiuhi, 
i-^So-iSoo.  walnut  with  yellow  pine  secondary. 
HOA  40' s".  \\'().-\  20' h",  DU.A  lys".  MHf  acces- 
sion 86.^4.4. 


I?.  Bottle  ease.  Halifax  Coioity.  i^So-iSoo,  walnut 
with  white  pine  drawer  fi-a me  and  bottom,  yellow  pine 
drawer  supports  and  guides.  HOA  j4'/ib",  W'OA  ig",  DOA 
14  ".  HHI  accession  Si.s.i. 


60 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


Virginia.  There  seems  to  have  been  no  production  of  bottle  cases  on 
stands  in  eastern  centers  such  as  Baltimore  and  Charleston;  some  ex- 
amples attributed  to  such  centers  in  fact  have  proven  to  be  North 
Carolina  work.  The  consumption  oi  spirits,  of  course,  was  a  favored 
pastime  everywhere.  In  the  early  1730s,  William  Byrd  noted  eastern 
North  Carolinians'  penchant  for  tippling,  observing  that  "Strong 
Drink"  was  obtained  there  "with  so  much  Difficult^',  that  they  are 
never  guilty  of  the  Sin  of  Suffering  it  to  Sour  upon  their  Hands."" 

The  cellaret  illustrated  in  figure  12,  with  its  flush-fitted  framed 
top,  blind-mitered  dovetailing,  and  very  subtly  tapered  legs,  is  a  so- 
phisticated adaptation  of  the  Chinese  taste,  augmented  with  the  ad- 
dition of  classical  moldings:  an  ovolo  on  the  top,  a  cove  and  ovolo 
atop  the  frame,  and  an  astragal  at  the  bottom  of  the  frame.  It  was 
originally  fitted  with  pierced  brackets  at  the  juncture  of  its  legs  and 
frame.  The  elegant  but  austere  top  is  a  form  referred  to  as  a  "tea 
chest  top"  in  British  and  American  cabinetmakers'  books  of  prices 
of  the  late  eighteenth  century.  The  mixing  slide  in  the  center  of 
the  frame  is  common  to  many  Roanoke  basin  cases  of  bottles,  al- 
though some  have  drawers  as  well,  particularly  during  the  Neoclassi- 
cal period.  The  brasses  are  original,  the  large  escutcheon  compli- 
menting the  vibrant  crotch  figure  of  the  facade,  which  follows  into 
the  front  fascia  of  the  lid,  having  been  cut  from  the  same  board. 

At  least  nine  bottle  cases  from  the  same  shop  that  produced  an- 
other example  (fig.  13)  have  been  recorded,  yet  no  other  case  furni- 
ture attributable  to  the  same  cabinetmaker  has  been  observed.  Typi- 
cal of  this  artisan's  work  are  the  bold  classical  moldings  of  the  framed 
top,  the  employment  of  an  H-plan  stretcher  system  with  the  dovetail 
joint  of  the  center  stretcher  exposed,  and,  most  particularly,  the  use 
of  contrasting  cockbeading  on  the  bottom  of  the  top  framing  and 
around  the  drawer.  Such  accents  began  to  appear  on  Roanoke  basin 
furniture  by  the  end  of  the  colonial  period  and  saw  extensive  use 
during  the  last  decade  of  the  eighteenth  century  through  about  1810. 
Maple,  dogwood,  holly,  and  elm  are  known  to  have  been  used  for 
these  details.  Like  most  bottle  cases,  this  example  is  partitioned  (fig. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIX'ER 


13a.  Detail  of  the  interior  of  figure  I ^.  with  a 
Diiteh  gill  bottle. 


13a)  to  accomodate  twelve  bottles.  The  parti- 
tions are  tenoned  to  the  case  sides.  Unlike  the 
preceding  example,  the  frame  molding  of  this 
piece  does  not  return  at  the  rear;  the  case  is 
held  in  place  by  a  wooden  "turn"  fixed  to  the 
rear  frame  with  a  woodscrew,  which  is  typical 
of  the  work  of  this  shop.  What  is  unusual  for 
the  Roanoke  basin  is  the  use  of  white  pine  as  a 
secondary  wood.  Imported  from  New  Eng- 
land, it  was  used  extensively  in  the  Neoclassical 
furniture  of  North  Carolina  port  towns,  but 
seldom  made  its  way  very  far  inland,  even  on  a 
navigable  river. 

Closely  aligned  with  cabinetmaking  styles  in 
Norfolk  during  the  last  quarter  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century  are  a  sizeable  group  of  Roanoke 
basin  case  pieces,  almost  invariably  of  walnut, 
which  demonstrate  the  taste  for  conservative 
forms  in  the  lower  Chesapeake.  Like  a  number 
of  Norfolk  chests  of  drawers,  this  example  (fig. 
14)  could  be  mistaken  for  Delaware  Valley 
work,  with  its  robust  cyma  top  molding  sur- 
mounting a  cove,  as  well  as  its  slender  fluted  quarter  columns.  These 
details,  however,  are  imbedded  in  British  st\'listic  traditions  which 
are  parallel  to  the  Philadelphia  style.  Little  Philadelphia  furniture 
was  imported  to  coastal  North  Carolina  before  the  early  nineteenth 
century,  and  even  then,  both  Boston  and  New  York  eclipsed  exports 
from  Pennsylvania.  There  is  little  evidence  that  cabinetmakers  from 
Philadelphia  emigrated  to  eastern  Virginia  or  North  Carolina.  As  a 
consequence,  the  influence  of  the  Delaware  Valley,  although  very 
strong  in  the  backcountry  South,  is  virtually  nonexistent  in  Chesa- 
peake styles  south  of  Virginia's  Northern  Neck.  This  chest  of  draw- 
ers reveals  a  Chesapeake  vernacular  in  its  proportions,  having  a  gen- 
erous width  of  almost  fortv-two  inches.  Its  columns  show  a  touch  of 


62 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


14-  Chest  of  drawers.  Bertie  County,  //-f-c^f,  walnut  with  white  pine  drawer 
frames  and  yellow  pine  dustboards.  HOAy^'^,",  UO.-l^/^",  IX)A  zo'^".  HHF  ac- 
cession So.  10. 1.  The  feet  of  this  chest  of  drawers  are  replacements  based  upon  the 
feet  on  other  related  case  pieces  fom  the  same  region. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


63 


naivete  in  the  ttirnings  of  the  bases  and  capitals,  which  are  precisely 
the  same.  In  other  words,  the  cabinetmaker  has  ignored  convention- 
al classical  architecture  by  utilizing  base  turnings,  complete  with  sco- 
tias  and  torus  turnings,  where  a  capital  turning  should  be.  The  deli- 
cate coved  bed  molding  above  the  feet  is  much  like  the  bed 
moldings  favored  by  John  Selden  and  other  Norfolk  cabinetmakers. 
Typical  of  the  region,  this  piece  has  kill-depth  dustboards  which  are 
full-bottom,  that  is,  the  full  thickness  oi  the  drawer  rails.  Like  the 
case  of  bottles  illustrated  in  fig.  13,  this  piece  utilizes  white  pine  as  a 
secondary  wood,  unusual  for  the  Roanoke  basin,  but  certainly  avail- 
able via  the  river  trade.  New  England  white  pine  was  esteemed  for 
its  easy-working  qualities,  which  contrasted  with  hard  yellow  pine's 
exceptionally  dense  latewood — the  darker  striations  of  the  grain  or 
annular  growth  rings — which  made  planing  and  joinery  more  diffi- 
cult, if  exceedingly  strong.  White  pine  was  imported  into  northeast- 
ern North  Carolina  as  early  as  1721." 

An  even  stronger  regional  vernacular  is  evident  in  the  virtually 
square  proportions  of  this  chest  of  drawers  (fig.  15),  which  lacks 
some  of  the  sophistication  of  the  preceding  example,  particularly  in 
the  ranking  of  its  drawers.  Although  the  drawers  uniformly  increase 
in  height  by  approximately  one-third  as  they  descend  to  the  base, 
the  bottom  drawer  is  so  tall  that  the  facade  ot  the  piece  would  have 
benefitted  from  the  incorporation  oi  five  rather  than  four  drawers. 
This  piece,  however,  is  not  without  st\'lish  details.  Typical  ot  most 
Roanoke  basin  chests  ot  drawers,  it  is  fitted  with  a  secondary  or 
"show"  top  that  conceals  the  dovetailed  case  joinery.  The  thick  case- 
stile  facings,  which  conceal  the  half-dovetailed  joinery  oi  the  drawer 
rails  and  drawer  supports,  are  mitred  at  the  top  and  bottom  rails. 
Only  a  few  other  case  pieces  from  the  region  share  this  nicet}',  but 
the  cove-and-ovolo  bed  mold  used  on  this  example  is  typical  of  the 
Roanoke  basin.  Here  the  fillet  of  the  bed  mold  is  particularly  tall, 
lending  much  the  appearance  of  an  architectural  plinth.  This  chest 
of  drawers  shares  both  this  detail  and  the  form  of  its  feet  with  a  size- 
able group  of  presses  from  one  Roanoke  basin  shop  (fig.  18).  The 


64  JOtSRNAI.    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


15.  Chest  of  drawers,  Halifax 
County,  iy8^-i8io,  walnut 
with  yellow  pine  throughout. 
HOA  42'/2",  WOA  41".  DOA 
21".  HHF  accession  82.4.1. 


close  similarity  of  drawer  construction  indicate  that  both  pieces  like- 
ly are  from  the  same  shop,  althotigh  none  ot  the  presses  have  mitred 
stile  facings. 

In  a  great  sense,  the  work  of  various  members  of  the  Sharrock 
family,  particularly  that  o[  Thomas  Sharrock  (c.  1741-1802)  and  his 
son  George  (1765-1814),  represents  the  most  typical  range  of 
Roanoke  basin  furniture  styles  ot  the  1765-1800  period.  Of  over 
twenty-three  Sharrock-attributed  pieces  known,  virtually  all  can  be 
characterized  by  a  small-urban  "neat  and  plain"  British  aesthetic  that 
typifies  the  entire  lower  Chesapeake  region  during  the  period.  In  the 
case  of  the  Sharrock  production,  the  exemplary  quality  of  the  join- 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


65 


i6.  Desk,  Northampton  Coun- 
ty, attributed  to  Thomas  Shar- 
rock.  l~^o-i~go,  ivahiut  with 
yellow  pine  throughout.  HOA 
4~'s",  W'OA  44' 2",  DUA  2}'/i". 
HHF  accession  80.9.1. 


ery  of  these  pieces  is  the  very  personification  of  "neat,"  which  to  pa- 
trons of  the  time  meant  that  constrtiction  was  of  the  highest  quahty. 
One  example  of  the  attention  to  hidden  detail  that  the  Sharrock 
shops  regtilarly  employed  is  the  blind-mitred  dovetails  joining  the 
ogee  feet  of  this  desk  (fig.  16),  a  rare  and  difficult  form  of  construc- 
tion. Like  the  teet  on  the  preceding  chest  of  drawers,  the  inside  pro- 
file is  turned  in,  a  detail  decidedly  in  the  Chinese  taste  that  appeared 
in  Britain  h\  the  17:50s.  The  same  Kirm  ot  toot  occurs  in  both  the 


66 


JOURNAL  OF  EARLY  SOUTHERN  DECORATIVE  ARTS 


S  V  M  M  E  R  1996 


Massachusetts  Bay  area  and  Philadelphia, 
but  hr  less  commonly  than  in  the  Roanoke 
basin.  Typical  of  all  of  the  case  furniture  by 
the  Sharrocks,  this  desk  has  three-quarter- 
depth  full-bottom  dustboards.  Its  straight- 
forward interior  is  virtually  identical  to  a  re- 
lated desk  and  bookcase  (fig.  17).  All  of  the 
known  Sharrock  pieces,  consisting  of  cor- 
ner cupboards,  presses,  chests  of  drawers, 
desks,  and  desks  and  bookcases,  appear  to 
date  before  Thomas  Sharrocks  death.  It  is 
virtually  impossible  to  separate  the  work  of 
Thomas  Sharrock  and  that  of  his  son 
George,  who  signed  and  dated  a  chest  of 
drawers  in  1787;  George  apparendy  moved 
to  the  eastern  Piedmont  of  North  Carolina 
before  1802. 

In  addition  to  George,  five  of  Thomas 
Sharrocks  sons  are  thought  to  have  been  as- 
sociated with  both  the  cabinetmaking  and 
house  joiners  trades.  Bryan  (1767-1795), 
James  (1773-d.c.  1799),  Samuel  (1774-1819), 
Steven  (b.  1778),  and  Thomas,  Jr.  (1767- 
1790)  all  appear  to  have  been  apprenticed  to 
their  father.  In  1801,  Steven  was  working 
with  Thomas,  Sr.,  at  Hope  Plantation,  pos- 
sibly engaged  in  finish  carpentry;  by  1820 
he  had  evidently  moved  to  Tennessee.'' 
While  no  hirniture  has  been  attributed  to 
any  oi  the  Sharrock  sons  other  than 
George,  it  is  probable  that  this  desk  and 
bookcase  was  made  by  one  of  them,  proba- 
bly Steven  or  Samuel.  The  form  of  the  bro- 
ken-scrolled pediment,  including  the  intri- 


17-  Desk  and  bookcase,  Halifax  or  NorthaiiipTon 
Count}',  iSs-iSoo,  walnut  with  yellow  pine  and 
walnut.  HOA  los's".  W'OA  4-^8",  DOA  J,'".  HHI  ac- 
cession I95.5./. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


67 


lya.  Detail  of  rosette 
oil  figure  /". 


cate  gouge-cut  rosettes  (fig.  17a),  along  with 
the  beaded  flush  panels  of  the  bookcase,  the 
format  of  the  interior  with  its  plain  prospect 
flanked  on  each  side  by  four  pigeonholes 
and  a  double  rank  of  drawers,  and  the  gen- 
eral proportions  fall  well  within  the  usual 
Sharrock  design  repertoire.  The  pediment 
has  an  enclosed  head  or  "bonnet,"  a  feature 
rare  south  of  Philadelphia  with  the  excep- 
tion of  southeastern  Virginia  and  the  Roan- 
oke basin  of  North  Carolina.  Various  st\'lis- 
tic  and  technological  features,  however, 
depart  from  the  Sharrock  norm.  The  tj'm- 
panum  openings,  although  geometrically 
similar  to  Sharrock  pediments,  are  larger. 
The  bookcase  bed  molding  is  attached  to 
the  bookcase,  and  the  bookcase  rests  on  the 
desk  rather  than  on  a  molded  plinth  usual 
to  Sharrock  work.  The  bed  molding  of  the 
desk  is  run  as  an  integral  part  of  the  bottom 
framing  rather  than  being  applied  separateh'.  The  framing  of  the 
bookcase  doors  is  pinned  at  each  joint,  and  the  drawer  rails  and  ac- 
companying dustboards  are  fitted  into  dadoes  run  the  depth  of  the 
case,  and  faced  off  with  veneer  on  the  case  stiles  rather  than  being  set 
into  blind  half-dovetailed  dadoes  characteristic  of  work  attributed  to 
Thomas  and  George  Sharrock.  The  finial  is  missing,  and  the  feet 
have  been  replaced;  the\'  probably  were  similar  to  those  of  the  desk 
in  figure  16. 

One  of  eight  known  pieces  from  one  shop,  consisting  of  six  china 
presses,  a  press-on-chest,  and  an  inlaid  stand,  the  press  in  figure  18  is 
typical  of  the  shop's  work  in  its  emplo\'ment  of  four  drawers  situated 
over  a  serving  or  writing  slide,  with  flat-paneled  doors  in  the  base. 
Intended  for  the  storage  of  table  ware,  presses  such  as  this  were  a 
common  product  of  Roanoke  basin  cabinet  shops,  but  are  less  fre- 


68 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


S  U  M  M  E  R    199  6 


quently  encountered  in  southside  Virginia. 
Wealthy  planter  and  Revolutionary  patriot 
Willie  Jones  built  an  impressive  tripartite 
frame  house,  the  Grove,  in  Halifax  County 
in  the  late  eighteenth  century.  Although  it 
fell  into  ruin  by  the  1950s,  at  the  time  of 
Jones's  death  in  1801  it  was  sumptuously  fur- 
nished. It  remained  so  as  late  as  1838,  when 
the  inventory  of  Jones's  son,  Willie  W,  re- 
vealed located  in  the  "Passage"  a  "China 
press"  filled  with  a  "Set  Gilt  china"  along 
with  "2  broken  Set  do."  and  104  other  as- 
sorted articles  of  ceramic  ware.  Even  at  this 
late  date,  versatility  in  the  use  of  rooms  was 
still  evident  in  the  Roanoke  basin.  While 
the  china  press  stood  in  the  wide  passage  of 
the  house — a  space  no  doubt  used  on  occa- 
sion for  dining — the  sideboard,  containing 
all  the  Jones  family  silver  and  stemware, 
stood  in  the  "Sitting  Room,"  and  "2  Dining 
Tables  &  Ends"  along  with  two  "Knife  cas- 
es" filled  with  flatware  occupied  the  "Big 
Room"  across  the  passage."  Although  made 
with  glazed  doors,  which  were  more  expen- 
sive than  paneled  units,  the  doors  of  presses 
such  as  this  not  infrequently  were  fitted  in- 
side with  fabric  to  conceal  rather  than  dis- 
play the  contents  of  the  upper  case.  This  ap- 
parent anomaly  has  been  verified  in  a 
number  of  instances  by  the  presence  of  early 
nail  holes.  The  pediment  and  feet  of  this 
press  are  replacements,  the  pediment  based 
on  other  examples  from  the  same  shop,  all 
but  one  of  which  have  delicate  dentil  cours- 


18.  China  press,  Halifax  Count)',  i'8)-iSoo.  walnut 
with  yellow  pine.  HOA  10^'  2".  WOA  47'/2",  DOA 
19' lib".  HHF accession  go. 2.'^. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER 


69 


19-  St'cTc'riirY  with  pn'is.  Halifax  or  Hertford 
CoiDity,  iS<;-i^(jy  walnut  ivirh  yellow  pine  and 
oak.  HOA  no', ".  \\r>A  4<;' , ",  DOA  20".  HHhacces- 
iioii  :'2.ii.2. 


es  characterized  by  a  convex  profile  of  the  top  of 
the  cuts  separating  each  dentil. 

Several  pieces  owned  by  Historic  Hope  Foun- 
dation are  from  the  shop  of  the  prolific  but  still 
anonymous  "WH"  cabinetmaker  who  is  thought 
to  have  been  a  German  artisan  who  settled  in 
the  Roanoke  basin  during  the  time  of  the  Revo- 
lutionary War.  Provenances  for  this  cabinetmak- 
ers furniture,  of  which  thirty-two  pieces  have 
been  identified,  center  around  southeastern  Hal- 
ifax, northwestern  Bertie,  and  southwestern 
Hertford  counties;  it  appears  to  span  the  period 
from  about  178s  to  1805.  A  roundel  in  the  tym- 
panum of  a  secretary-press  (fig.  19)  is  cut  with 
the  initials  "CRI,"  believed  to  be  those  of  one  of 
the  cabinetmaker's  patrons.  One  case  of  bottles 
from  the  same  shop  has  the  initials  of  another 
customer,  but  eight  of  the  known  pieces  display 
the  initials  "WH,"  most  of  them  on  a  t\'mpa- 
num,  and  these  are  considered  to  be  the  initials 
of  the  maker.  A  desk  with  a  fully  carved  fall- 
board  in  the  collection  of  the  Colonial  Williams- 
burg Foundation  has  a  prospect  door  inlaid  with 
these  initials  and  the  date  "August  the  5  1789." 
The  inlay  in  each  instance  is  a  white  putty-like 
material  filling  incised  cuts  in  the  surface.  The 
fill,  at  least  on  one  example  tested,  is  composed 
of  whiting  (chalk),  a  small  amount  of  white 
lead,  and  a  trace  of  sulfur,  with  a  binder  com- 
posed of  wax,  a  natural  resin,  and  possibly  lin- 
seed oil.  This  mixture  apparently  was  familiar  in 
the  German  lands,  where  it  was  called  Wachseiu- 
gList'n.'"  The  resin  in  this  paste  evidently  provid- 
ed adhesive  qualities,  since  the  delicate  incising 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOllTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


of-  the  initials  and  borders  is  not  imdercut  to  retain  the  material. 
"WH"  effectively  used  this  white  inlay  in  conjunction  with  low-re- 
lief carved  leafwork  and  shell-like  patterns,  all  geometrically  com- 
posed with  a  compass,  and  ebonized  after  the  carving  was  complet- 
ed. This  created  a  vibrant  Baroque  interplay  of  color  between  the 
white  inlay,  blackened  carving,  and  the  reddish  varnish  surface  of 
the  walnut. 

Although  evidently  trained  in  the  Franco-German  style,  as  a 
blockfront  desk  in  the  collection  of  the  Virginia  Museum  of  Fine 
Arts  asserts  with  considerable  Louis  XV  verve,  "WH"  adapted  to  the 
British  mode  of  the  Roanoke  basin  without  giving  up  stylistic  details 
that  make  his  work  unique  among  southern  furniture.  The  lacy 
flamelike  finials,  whirling-star  rosette  inlays  with  center  roundels  of  fc 

decoratively  turned  bone,  and  squared  inset  quarter  columns  are  but  ^ 

a  few  of  the  details,  in  addition  to  ebonized  carving  and  wachiein-  ^ 

glasen,  that  this  artisan  employed  as  striking  departures  from  the  un-  2 

derstated  norm  of  lower  Chesapeake  furniture.  Unusual  on  this  sec-  Q 

retary  is  the  press  standing  atop  it,  which,  unlike  the  bookcase  that 
occupies  the  same  space  on  other  American  writing  furniture  of  the  g 

period,  is  the  full  depth  of  the  lower  case.  With  this  depth,  and  the  E 

plate  grooves  planed  into  the  shelves,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  up-  o 

per  case  was  intended  as  a  china  press,  not  a  bookcase.  Two  other  >- 

"WTi"  pieces  with  the  same  format  have  been  recorded,  one  with  § 

linen  trays  concealed  behind  cabinet  doors  below  the  secretary  draw-  |,_ 

er.  Usual  to  these  pieces  is  the  serving  slide  situated  between  a  pair  of  _ 

bolection  moldings  at  the  top  of  the  desk.  However  in  figure  19  the  g 

ogee  feet,  unlike  all  of  the  other  feet  found  on  "WH"  pieces,  have  an  ^ 

outward  curve  to  their  inside  profile. 

With  even  more  elaborate  ebonized  carving  of  its  tympanum,  the 
roundel  above  the  doors  of  a  corner  cupboard  (fig.  20)  bear  the  ini- 
tials "WH,"  here  rendered  in  the  style  of  a  "round"  hand.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  this  cabinetmaker  either  owned  a  book  of  cyphers  or  at 
least  was  conversant  in  the  design  of  them,  for  he  used  various  letter- 
ing forms  more  rv'pical  of  engraved  work  than  furniture.  Some  of  his 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


20.  Clipboard.  Halifax  or  Hertford  Count)'. 
i~S<;-i-()\.  walnut  with  yellow  pine  and  walnut. 
H(M  no",  uo.-i  <;4';".  HHF accession  's.yi. 


tympana  are  even  more  elaborate  than  this  glo- 
rious example,  and  are  replete  with  spread- 
wing  eagles.  Masonic  iconography,  and  even 
grinning  demon's  heads.  All  oi  the  cupboards 
examined  were  painted  white  inside,  with 
bright  red  edging  oi  the  shelves.  The  panels 
that  take  the  place  ot  what  otherwise  would 
have  been  glazed  lights  at  the  bottoms  oi  the 
upper  doors  are  a  standard  convention  oi  iur- 
nittire  made  in  the  Roanoke  basin  and  east  to 
Edenton,  but  here  (fig.  20a)  the  cabinetmaker 
has  added  fluted  and  gad-rooned  ellipses,  the 
ebonized  carving  set  oii  with  turned  bone 
roundels  in  the  centers,  held  in  place  with  brass 
escutcheon  pins.  The  same  motii"  is  repeated 
on  a  grander  scale  in  the  lower  cabinet.  Al- 
though these  carved  elements  appear  to  mimic 
Neoclassical  paterae,  in  reality  they  are  far 
more  akin  to  similar  ornament  Found  on  Ger- 
manic ceramic  tile  and  cast-iron  parlor  stoves 
oi  the  mid-eighteenth  century  and  earlier.' 
These  shell-like  ellipses  reflect  the  essentially 
Baroque  curves  of  the  pediment  above. 

In  a  sideboard  from  the  "WH"  shop  (fig.  21), 
the  combination  oi"  the  late  Baroque  style  ot 
the  upper  case  with  the  Neoclassical  form  of 
the  legs  should  be  no  surprise  in  view  of  the 
Teutonic  penchant  for  clinging  to  earlier  fash- 
ions. Ihe  blocked  plan,  howe\'er,  is  a  remark- 
able contrast  with  most  American  furniture  of 
the  period,  parallelled  only  by  a  unique  group 
of  earlv  nineteenth-century  tables  from  the 
Connecticut  River  valley.  The  blocking  plan  of 
the  side  bays  of  this  sideboard  (fig.  21a)  follows 
that  of  the  blockfront  desk  at  the  Virginia  Mu- 


72 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


2oa.  Detail  of  carved  panel 
on  figure  20. 


seum  ot  Fine  Arts  mentioned  above.  "WH"  repeated  this  design  in 
more  than  facades.  The  profile  ot  the  upper  hghts  of  the  corner  cup- 
board illustrated  in  figure  20  is  a  diminutive  version  of  the  same 
plan,  and  the  profiles  of-  the  arched  stretchers  of  a  demilune  table 
and  a  case  ot  bottles  from  the  "WH"  shop  utilize  the  same  design. 
The  work  of  a  second  artisan  is  evident  in  the  construction  of  this 
sideboard,  especially  the  drawers,  which  do  not  have  the  walnut 
drawer  frames  and  flush-fitted  bottoms  usual  to  work  of  "WH."  Sev- 
eral other  pieces  from  the  shop  also  have  similar  variations,  not  un- 
usual in  an  establishment  that  quite  obviously  was  successful  and 
could  make  use  of  one  or  more  journeymen.  In  this  instance,  the 
second  hand  in  the  "WH"  shop  must  have  overcome  the  master's  ob- 
vious aversion  to  glued  joints,  since  the  cored  drawers  and  cabinet 
doors  are  conventionally  joined  and  covered  on  the  exterior  with 
sheet  veneer.  This  stands  in  considerable  contrast  to  the  bizarre  con- 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


73 


11.  Sideboard.  Halt- 
fax  or  Hertford 
County,  ijg^-iSos, 
walnut  with  yellow 
pine  throughout.  HOA 
Spys".  WOA  6g'2'\ 
DOA  JS^/s".  HHf  ac- 
cession Q2.I.I.  The 
face  veneer  on  the 
center  drawer  has 
been  replaced. 


2ia.  Detail  of  drawer 
of  figure  21. 


74 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


struction  of  the  demilune  table  mentioned  above,  which  also  has  ta- 
pering legs,  but  its  skirt  laminates  are  held  fast  with  a  dozen  rivets 
piercing  the  entire  stack,  without  a  drop  of  glue  needed. 

A  type  of  six-legged  dining  table  common  to  southeastern  Vir- 
ginia and  the  Albemarle  region  of  North  Carolina  follows  one  of  the 
standard  British  designs  which  for  some  reason  was  not  popular  in 
the  North.  These  tables  employ  a  fixed  leg  in  the  center  of  each  end 
skirt  and  a  pair  of  fly  legs  on  each  side,  which  would  seem  to  repre- 
sent a  plan  that  offers  stability  to  tables  of  considerable  size.  That  in- 
deed is  true,  but  North  Carolina  tables  that  do  not  exceed  four  feet 
in  length  have  been  recorded  with  this  leg  system.  Turned-leg 
turned-foot  tables  of-  this  plan  have  been  recorded  in  Virginia,  dat- 
ing as  early  as  the  1750s.  In  North  Carolina,  they  have  been  encoun- 
tered with  turned  legs  and  claw  feet,  straight  or  "Marlborough"  legs, 
and  tapering  Neoclassical  legs.  The  example  in  figure  22  is  somewhat 


22.  Dining  table, 
Northampton 
County.  i~go— 
iSio.  walnut  with 
yellow  pine.  HOA 
27-%",  WOA  48", 
DOA  17  ".  HHF  ac- 
cession ^j.14.1. 
MRF-246S. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


75 


transitional  in  nature  in  that  the  tapered  legs  are  chamfered  in  the 
manner  of  a  straight-leg  table,  somewhat  of  a  Lower  Chesapeake  re- 
minder that  tapered  forms  actually  were  avidly  incorporated  into  the 
late  Rococo  style.  The  same  might  be  said  of  the  case  of  bottles  illus- 
trated in  figure  12.  The  third  or  1762  edition  of  Chippendale's  Gen- 
rleDhV!  a>id  Cdbi)iet-Maker'i  Director  illustrates  several  applications 
of  what  was  known  as  a  "term  foot"  in  the  trade.  This  sort  of  "foot," 
which,  in  the  trade  vernacular,  meant  the  entire  leg,  was  derived 
from  the  Graeco-Roman  thmDi  or  reri)i,  a  tapering  pedestal  sur- 
mounted by  a  bust  or  figure. 

A  relatively  small  amount  of  furniture  fully  in  the  Neoclassical 
style  has  survived  from  the  Roanoke  basin,  and,  for  that  matter, 
from  the  entire  Albemarle  region.  There  are  several  reasons  for  this; 
one  of  them  was  taste.  The  same  conservatism  that  encouraged  cabi- 
netmakers' production  of  1750-style  chairs  until  past  1790,  for  exam- 
ple, resisted  the  wholesale  adaptation  of  Neoclassical  form.  As  a  re- 
sult, we  often  find  Roanoke  basin  furniture  such  as  a  china  press  that 
makes  no  more  of  a  nod  to  the  new  taste  than  perhaps  the  addition 
of  string  inla\'  to  drawers  and  cabinet  doors.  The  rest  of  the  piece  re- 
mained solidly  within  the  architectural  mainstream  of  an  earlier 
time.  Despite  his  education  and  wealth,  David  Stone  himself  felt 
more  comfortable  with  a  manor  whose  facades  were  solidly  rooted  in 
the  old  classicism  rather  than  Neoclassicism.  But  eastern  Carolini- 
ans, particularK'  in  the  port  towns,  and  later  upri\'er,  did  at  length 
embrace  the  stylistic  inevitable.  The  regional  cabinet  trade,  however, 
suddenly  was  faced  with  a  diverse  set  of  new  technological  problems 
to  master,  such  as  making  cored  structures,  cutting  and  applying 
face  veneers,  and  producing  string,  bundled,  and  figural  inlavs.  In 
the  late  eighteenth  centur\',  many  such  functions  became  the  do- 
main of  urban  specialists  who  could  produce  work  faster  and  cheap- 
er. And  the  cities  which  developed  the  greatest  degree  of  specializa- 
tion— Boston,  New  York,  and  Philadelphia — could  ship  furniture  to 
North  Carolina  and  outsell  the  local  products.  Furniture  with  even 
simple  triple-stringing  such  as  the  small  side  table  in  figure  23,  then, 
is  a  rarer  survival  of  regional  work  than  earlier  srv'les. 

76  JOURNAL   OF    EARLY   SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE   ARTS  SUMMER    1996 


The  Roanoke  River  basin,  due  to  the  size  of  its  professional  cabi- 
net trade,  was  not  a  region  which  produced  much  of  what  today  is 
considered  "country"  work.  That  is,  furniture  made  primarily  by 
part-time  artisans  not  "brought  up"  in  the  trade,  working  without 
the  benefit  oi  apprenticeship  to  a  skilled  workman.  Simple  furniture 
indeed  was  produced  in  the  region,  but  it  nevertheless  shows  its 
pedigree,  whether  from  the  shop  of  a  cabinetmaker,  made  on  the 
premises  by  a  master  carpenter,  or  produced  in  the  workshop  of  a 
turner  skilled  at  making  the  posts  of  chairs  and  beds.  The  chest  illus- 


13.  Sit^e  table,  western  Bertie 
Comity,  1790-1810,  walnut 
throughout.  HOA  28%  ",  W'OA 
igVa",  DOA  20' i ".  HHF accession 

77.1.4.  MRF-I2,04<;. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


24-  Chen.  Hertford 
County,  1780-1800,  yel- 
low pine  throughout. 
HOA  zoVa",  WOA  43%", 
DOA  18" /lb".  HHF 
accession  73.^.7. 


trated  in  figure  24,  which  is  painted  a  deep  prussian  blue,  clearly  is 
the  work  of  a  cabinet  shop.  This  is  evident  not  only  in  the  qualit)'  ot 
the  joinery,  but  also  in  the  use  ot  battens  fitted  at  each  side  ot  the 
top,  the  qualit)'  and  form  of  moldings,  and  the  use  ot  ogee  teet.  A 
more  expensive  piece  might  simply  have  been  made  ot  walnut,  with 
blind-mitred  dovetails  instead  of  exposed  joinery. 

Corner  cupboards,  or  "bowfats"  as  they  ofi:en  were  amusingly  de- 
scribed in  inventories  by  English  colonials  utterly  unfamiliar  with 
the  French  "buffet,"  were  derived  from  interior  architecture.  It  was 
not  until  the  first  quarter  of  the  eighteenth  century,  in  fact,  that  tree- 
standing  corner  cupboards  became  himiliar,  since  earlier  they  were 
simply  built  into  the  room,  a  practice  which  continued  in  most  ur- 
ban areas.  Many  such  architectural  cupboards — including  a  pair 
built  at  each  side  of  the  fireplace  in  the  King-Bazemore  house  par- 
lor— were  constructed  with  curving  backs  in  imitation  of  the  classi- 


78 


JOIIRNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


cal  niches  intended  to  house  statuary.  In 
eastern  North  CaroHna,  this  construc- 
tion was  retained  in  a  large  percentage  of 
the  free-standing  corner  cupboards  made 
in  the  region.  The  example  shown  in  fig- 
ure 25  has  wide  boards  bent  to  fit  the  ra- 
diused  backs  of  the  shelves,  with  the 
joints  neatly  concealed  with  lip-molded 
vertical  laths  (fig.  25a).  The  early  date  of 
this  cupboard  is  suggested  not  only  by 
its  form,  but  also  its  hardware.  What  ap- 
pear to  be  butt  hinges  in  realit)'  are 
wrought-iron  "dovetail"  hinges,  as  they 
were  called  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
used  here  as  butts.  Known  today  as  "but- 
terfly" hinges,  shop  inventories  verify 
that  they  were  in  use  in  the  Carolina 
coastal  plain  as  late  as  the  1770s.  Nicely 
fashioned  wooden  latches  for  the  left- 
side doors  (fig.  25b),  captured  inside  iron 
staples,  speak  to  a  time  when  imported 
hardware  was  less  available. 

This  cupboard,  like  many  corner  cup- 
boards, was  very  likely  the  work  of  a 
house  joiner,  who  would  have  been  well 
acquainted  with  all  the  methodology 
needed  to  produce  such  a  piece.  In  1772 
William  Luten,  a  skilled  carpenter  work- 
ing thirty  miles  to  the  east  in  Chowan 
Count}',  charged  Elizabeth  Tullan  £2.10 
for  "one  Bofeat  finding  planck  & 
knails."  Two  years  later  he  charged  an- 
other patron  £1.15  "To  Making  Bofet  at 
his  hous,"  revealing  the  itinerant  nature 


25.  Cupboard,  Bertie  County,  1760-1780,  yellow 
pine  throughout.  HUA  92' s",  WOA  50  ".  HHF  acces- 
sion So.  -.1. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLIN.^    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


79 


25a.  Detail  of  interior  of  figure  is- 

2sb.  Detail  of  upper  left  door  lateh  of  figure  2s. 

ot  the  carpenters  trade  in  contrast  with  that  oi"  the  "shop  joiner,"  or 
cabinetmaker,  who  customarily  worked  at  a  bench." 

Without  a  certain  amount  of  scrutiny,  the  simple  nature  ot  the 
himible  table  shown  in  figure  26  could  be  taken  as  the  work  oi  a 
semi-skilled  rural  workman,  but  this  is  tar  from  the  case.  The  simple 
columnar  legs  of  the  table  are  not  a  measure  of  the  maker's  lack  of 
abilit)'  at  the  lathe,  but  instead  are  an  inexpensive  and  pragmatic  so- 
lution to  the  need  tor  a  table  that  likely  was  intended  for  kitchen 
service.  When  new,  the  turnings  were  crisp,  it  plain,  each  ot  the  leg 
pummels — the  squared  portions — finished  where  they  meet  the 
shaft  with  a  nicely  radiused  turn.  The  lower  edges  of  the  frame  are 
rtm  with  a  flush  bead,  as  are  the  outer  edges  ot  the  stretchers,  which 
are  only  halt  the  thickness  ot  the  lower  leg  pummels,  a  late  detail. 
Wear  has  reducect  r^vo  ot  the  teet,  but  those  at  the  rear  verv  likely  are 


80 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


S  U  M  M  E  R    I  9  9  6 


nearly  their  original  configuration.  The  top  is  composed  of  five 
boards  rather  than  the  two  or  three  that  might  be  expected  on  an 
earlier  table,  but  the  multiple  boards  were  an  insurance  against 
warpage.  Care  is  shown  in  the  joinery  of  the  frame,  which  is  triple- 
pinned  at  each  of  its  full-height  mortise  and  tenon  joints.  The  base 
retains  what  is  probably  a  nineteenth-century  coating  of  reddish- 
brown  paint,  the  "Spanish  brown"  that  would  have  been  preferred 
tor  such  a  utilitarian  piece  even  when  it  was  new. 

Sharing  many  of  the  same  details  as  the  previous  table,  such  as  a 


26.   Table,  Bertie  County.  iJSO-nSo,  yellow  pine  and  hickory.  HOA  26'/2",  WOA 
j87a",  DOAJ2  78.  HHf  accession  7}.  12. 8. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


27-  Table.  Hertford  County,  i^so—i — o,  yellow  pine  and  maple.  HDA  26-%",  VC'OA 
^9'V/r. ",  DOA  jO-^'-i ".  HHF  accession  90.2.1^. 


molded  frame  and  stretchers,  another  example  (fig.  27)  is  no  easier 
to  date  precisely.  The  slender  inverted  vase  turnings  ot  the  legs  indi- 
cate at  least  a  mid-century  date  tor  the  table,  yet  the  top  is  fastened 
to  the  frame  with  wooden  pins  rather  than  clasp-head  or  other  types 
of  finish  nails.  Face-nailing  became  common  tor  simple  table  tops 
after  the  1740s,  so  a  table  later  than  that  normally  would  not  be  en- 
countered with  a  pinned  top.  Here  the  quality  ot  the  turnings  has 
something  of  a  hierarchy  from  top  to  bottom.  Just  under  the  upper 
stiles  the  legs  have  a  delicate  compressed  ball,  while  at  the  teet  there 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


are  no  fillets  to  define  either  the  foot  or  its  necking.  The  table  origi- 
nally was  "colored,"  in  the  language  of  the  time,  apparently  in  a  dark 
Prussian  blue. 

A  hallmark  of  southern  post-and-round  armchairs  of  any  period 
are  turned  arms  which  project  over  the  front  legs  rather  than  being 
tenoned  into  them.  Although  the  chair  in  figure  28  is  a  nineteenth- 
century  example,  at  least  a  portion  of  the  style  of  its  turnings  is 
much  earlier.  Arms  with  similar  cylindrical  sections  over  the  front 
posts  have  been  noted  on  seventeenth  and  early  eighteenth  century 
chairs  from  southeastern  Virginia.  Not  unusual  for  any  chair  of  this 
size  is  the  enormous  amount  of  surface  wear.  The  legs  are  reduced 
into  the  lower  base  round  joints,  and  the  front,  sides,  and  backs  of 
the  posts  have  flats,  all  caused  by  generations  of  toddlers  pushing  the 
chair  about  on  gritty  floors  while  mastering  the  art  of  walking. 

The  form  of  the  robusdy  turned  finials  and  the  use  of  squat  vase 
turnings  on  both  the  front  and  back  posts  of  the 
chair  shown  in  figure  29,  along  with  the  stout  di- 
ameter of  the  posts,  indicate  an  eighteenth-centu- 
ry date  for  this  chair.  The  turnings,  particularly 
the  finials,  are  much  in  the  style  of  eastern  Con- 
necticut, which  is  true  of  other  Roanoke  basin 
chairs  made  both  earlier  and  later  than  this  exam- 
ple. Relatively  few  eastern  North  Carolina  ladder- 
back  side  chairs  that  date  as  early  as  this  example 
have  survived,  and  this  chair  has  suffered  the  rav- 
ages of  both  man  and  weather.  Its  slats,  which 
originally  were  steeply  arched,  have  lost  their  tops, 
and  the  feet  have  rotted  to  the  extent  that  the 
front  lower  base  round  is  missing. 

The  relatively  heavy  posts  of  another  chair  (fig. 
30),  considered  within  the  regional  vernacular, 
date  it  at  least  to  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  It  has  an  attenuated  version  of  the  finials 
of  the  previous  example;  its  double  ring  turnings, 
with  gently  swelled  sections  between  these  turn- 


28.  Child's  armchair,  Halifax  County, 
1800-1820.  maple  arid  oak.  HOA  u/s",  W'VA 
if'lih",  DOA  10'^  ".  HHF accesiioii  7^.8.1. 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIf 


29-  Sirle  chair.  Hertford  Count)/,  i-do-iSo.  maple 
and  ash.  HOA  ^g'  < ",  WOA  20  'Ik",  Vhia  is%  ".  HHF 
accession  91.7.1. 


?o.  Side  chair,  eastern  Bertie  Count)', 
l~90-lSlo,  maple  and  hickory.  HOA  ^^%".  WOA 
I-  '7/6",  noA  14'  2".  HHF  accession  7j.12.11. 


ings,  appears  to  occur  in  the  south-central  portion  oi  Bertie  County, 
very  much  in  the  same  area  where  Hope  is  located.  "Common" 
chairs,  as  ladderbacks  were  called  on  Carolina  inventories,  often 
were  the  work  of  specialist  chairmakers,  who,  like  the  cabinetmakers 
ot"  the  region,  were  farmer-artisans.  Like  case  furniture,  post-anti- 
round  chairs  have  their  own  stylistic  and  technical  language  which  is 
repeated  from  piece  to  piece  in  the  same  shop.  Significant  on  this  ex- 
ample are  "locked"  seat  lists.  That  is,  the  side  seat  lists,  rather  than 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    19  9  6 


fitting  drilled  mortises  which  are  tangent 
to  the  holes  for  the  front  and  rear  lists, 
actually  bisect  the  tenons  of  the  front  and 
rear  lists.  This  prevented  the  chair  from 
spreading  apart  from  side  to  side;  the 
strike  lines  that  determined  the  centers  of 
the  overlapping  seat  list  holes  are  visible 
on  the  back  post  in  the  illustration. 

Yet  another  chair,  part  of  a  surviving 
set  of  six  (fig.  31),  could  either  be  per- 
ceived as  a  slight  degeneration  of  the  styl- 
istic details  oi  the  previous  example,  or 
understood  as  the  inevitable  continuing 
development  of  regional  style.  In  actuali- 
ty, both  perceptions  are  true.  Here,  the 
double  rings  have  diminished  to  single 
rings,  the  finials  have  become  a  simplified 
version  of  the  earlier  examples,  and  lock 
joints  are  not  used  at  the  seat  lists.  Never- 
theless, this  set  of  chairs  is  from  a  very 
substantial  chairmaking  tradition  which 
dominated  the  southern  portion  of  North- 
ampton County  and  the  upper  quadrant 
of  Bertie  County  in  the  early  nineteenth      31.  Sifie  chair,  eastern  Northampton  County, 
century.  Dozens  of  examples  have  been      tSoo-iSjo.  hickory,  hoa  j^4<i",  kva  iS'/s",  doa 
seen,    and    with    sufficient    variation    to      i4^s".  hhf accession  /j.12.1-6.  MRf-12,041. 
know  that  several  chairmakers  were  pro- 
ducing turnings  in  this  style.  The  peaked  slats  are  often  thought  to 
be  a  later  detail,  yet  they  appear  at  least  as  early  as  the  first  quarter  of 
the  seventeenth  century  in  Dutch  engravings.  Holland,  in  fact,  is 
credited  with  having  developed  the  ladderback  form  of  post-and- 
round  chair.'" 

As  the  finial  turnings  indicate,  the  tiny  chair  illustrated  in  figure 
32  falls  within  the  same  school  of  chairmaking  as  the  preceding  side 
chair.  Unlike  figure  28,  the  arms  of  this  chair  are  tenoned  into  the 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLIN.-\    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


32.  Child's  armchair,  Bertie  County,  1S10—1S40, 
maple  and  ash.  HOA  2i7s",  W'OA  /j?4  ",  DOA  11'/: 
HHF  accession  86.2.1. 


ixonx.  posts,  much  in  the  manner  of  New 
England  ladderbacks.  The  wear  on  the 
tront  posts  has  revealed  the  bottoms  ot 
holes  drilled  tor  the  arms,  and  provided  evi- 
dence at  the  same  time  that  the  chairmaker 
used  a  round-nosed  shell  auger  to  drill 
these  mortises.  This  is  a  good  illustration  ot 
the  persistence  of  trade  tradition,  for  shell 
augers  had  been  in  use  tor  several  hundred 
years  by  the  time  this  chair  was  made.  As 
something  of  a  stylistic  parallel  to  such  per- 
sistence, the  use  of  finials  on  the  tront  posts 
lends  a  medieval  aspect  to  the  chair. 

Somewhat  related  to  earlier  post-and- 
round  chairs  made  in  Bertie  County  in 
regard  to  the  use  of  ring  turnings  on  the 
posts  and  the  form  ot  its  finials,  the  chair  il- 
lustrated in  figure  33  has  ponderous  scrolled 
arms  far  more  typical  ot  chairs  made  before 
1750.  On  post-and-round  chairs,  the  reten- 
tion ot  much  earlier  features  is  by  no  means 
unusual;  an  even  later  example  of  such  cul- 
tural lag  is  seen  on  a  youth's  armchair  from 
Bertie  Count)'.'"  The  riot  oi  deep  astragal 
turnings  on  both  ot  the  front  stretchers  of 
the  chair  illustrated  here  is  repeated  on  a  virtually  identical  armchair 
in  the  MESDA  collection.  Both  chairs  have  strong  traces  ot  their 
original  red  paint.  This  example  retains  most  ot  its  toot  turnings. 
Turned  rear  teet  are  seldom  encountered  on  American  chairs  made 
in  the  Northeast,  but  they  occur  before  1700  in  the  Chesapeake 
South,  where  they  were  accompanied  by  decoratively  turned  side 
and  rear  stretchers  as  well.  Such  attention  to  side  and  rear  base  mem- 
bers is  common  in  the  Low  Countries  and  France,  and  very  likely 
was  brought  to  northeastern  North  Carolina  by  emigrant  Hugue- 
nots at  the  be^innintr  of  the  eie;hteenth  centurv. 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


33.  Armchair,  Halifax  County,  1800-1820,  maple  and 
hickory.  HOA  ^o'A",  WOA  z^'/s",  DOA  18".  HHF accession 
87.29.1. 


34.  Side  chair,  Halifax  County,  1810—18^0,  ash.  HOA 
i^Va ",  WOA  lyVs ",  DOA  i^Vz ".  HHF  accession  83.11.1. 


One  of-  an  assembled  set  of  five  matching  chairs,  the  turnings  ot 
the  back  posts  of  figure  34  are  characteristic  of  a  large  sampling  of 
post-and-round  chairs  made  in  Halifax  County.  Most  distinctive  are 
the  pairs  of  barrel-like  turnings  between  the  slats.  Also  typical  of  the 
Halifax  chairmaking  school  are  the  numerous  incised  rings  on  the 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN 


35-  Bedstead,  Bertie  County.  iSoo-iS^o.  mulberry.  HUA  28".  WOA  <j}'A  ",  LOA  -^f". 
HHF  accession  72.j7.i- 


posts  which  appear  to  be  decorative  but  in  reahry  are  strike-lines 
used  by  the  chairmaker  to  indicate  the  positions  oi  skits  and  stretch- 
ers as  well  as  the  centers  oi  the  "barrel"  turnings.  Aher  the  sawn 
blanks  for  the  posts  were  turned  round,  the  chairmaker  used  a  strik- 
ing-stick set  with  iron  points  to  mark  oft  all  oi  these  lines  simultane- 
ously, thereby  sa\'ing  the  time  oi  measuring  these  positions,  and  en- 
suring uniformity. 

The  use  oi  spindles  between  the  bed  rails  and  the  head  and  toot 
rails  of  the  bedstead  illustrated  in  figure  35  are  related  to  the  con- 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


struction  of  post-and-round  armchairs  horn  Virginia  and  eastern 
North  Carolina  that  date  as  early  as  the  first  quarter  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century.  These  chairs,  which  have  rail-and-spindle  backs 
rather  than  turned  horizontal  back  members  with  spindles  set  be- 
tween them,  are  another  manifestation  of  Continental  influence  in 
the  lower  Chesapeake.  Rail-and-spindle  chairs  seem  to  disappear 
near  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century,  but  beds  with  this  construc- 
tion continue  later,  and  as  a  consequence  they  are  ofi:en  thought  to 
be  earlier  than  they  actually  are.  Most  beds  of  this  type  have  been 
found  in  Bertie  County.  On  the  examples  examined,  including  the 
bed  illustrated  here,  the  head  and  foot  assemblies  are  permanently 
joined,  obviously  due  to  the  complexit)'  of  the  spindle  construc- 
tion.The  side  rails  are  held  to  these  assemblies  with  bed  roping 
rather  than  bolts.  The  bed  shown  here  is  made  entirely  of  red  mul- 
berry, a  wood  which  appears  to  have  been  favored  by  eastern  North 
Carolina  turners,  for  it  appears  in  post-and-round  chairs  dating  as 
early  as  1700,  but  is  also  frequently  encountered  in  nineteenth  cen- 
tury chairs  and  other  turned  work. 

Like  the  architecture  of  both  Hope  Plantation  and  the  King-Baze- 
more  House,  the  Roanoke  basin  furniture  these  buildings  contain 
documents  the  existence  of  strongly  recognizable  regional  stv'les  that 
were  adapted  from  Britain  and  the  urban  centers  of  the  Lower 
Chesapeake.  The  conservative  style  of  this  work,  in  combination 
with  the  exceedingly  high  quality  of  joinery  so  characteristic  of  fur- 
niture in  the  area,  very  well  suited  David  Stone  and  his  eastern  Car- 
olina peers.  The  selected  examples  of  Historic  Hope's  Roanoke  basin 
furniture  illustrated  here,  then,  comprise  a  window  upon  the  fash- 
ions and  times  of  one  particularlv  prominent  man  whose  tastes  both 
drew  from  and  contributed  to  the  arts  of  the  rec^ion. 


I.  John  E,  Tyler,  "Hope  Plancation  in  North  C.irohn.i."  Tlv  M,ig,!zine  ANTIQUES.  J.inLi- 
ar)- 1989,  322-29;  Catherine  W.  Bishir,  North  Carolina  Architecture  (Chapel  Hilh  University  of 


FURNITURE    IN    NORTH    CAROLINA    ROANOKE    RIVER    BASIN  89 


North  C.uolinj  Press,  1990).  82-84.  The  author  would  hke  to  thank  John  E.  Tyler,  David 
Wesbrook,  Kevin  Hughes,  and  Johanna  Metzgar  Brown  tor  their  assistance. 

2.  John  Bivins,  The  Furniture  of  Coastal  North  Ciro/inii.  foo-iSjio  (Winston-Salem,  N.C.: 
Museum  of  Early  Southern  Decorative  Arts,  1988). 

3.  Elkanah  Watson,  The  Memoirs  of  Elkanah  Watwn.  ed.Winslow  C.  Watson  (New  York. 
i8s6),  58. 

4.  Records  of  the  1820  Census  of  Manufactures.  North  Carolina,  Hertford  Count)'  returns. 

5.  Bivins,  50i-3,  61. 

6.  Ibid..  57,  127,  S14-18. 

7.  A  1690-1730  turned  bed  with  spindles  fitted  between  the  rails  and  turned  crossmembers 
at  head  and  toot  is  in  the  collection  of  the  Museum  ot  Fine  Arts  m  Boston.  Though  it  does  not 
have  full-height  posts,  this  eastern  Massachusetts  example,  v\'hich  is  made  of  ash,  very  likely 
predates  the  bed  illustrated  here.  It  is  illustrated  in  Jonathan  L.  Fairbanks  and  Elizabeth  Bid- 
well  Banks,  American  Furniture:  1620  to  the  Present  (New  York:  Richard  Marek,  1981),  29. 

8.  For  examples,  see  Robert  F.  Trent,  Hearts  and  Crowns:  Folk  Chairs  of  the  Connecticut 
Coast  1^20—1840  (New  Haven.  Conn.:  New  Haven  Historical  Society,  I9~''),  p.  31,  fig.  i.  and  p. 
35,  fig.  5;  Benno  M.  Forman.  American  Seating  Furniture  l6w~t-io  (New  >'ork:  'W'.W.  Norton, 
1988),  p.  252,  cat.  52,  and  p.  321,  fig.  174. 

9.  Bivins,  512. 

10.  Another  chair  trom  the  same  shop,  but  missing  its  shoe,  reduced  in  height,  and  modern 
blocking  added,  is  illustrated  in  Fig.  6.129  ot  Bivins. 

11.  Another  chair  trom  the  same  shop,  but  with  no  blocks  and  the  rear  seat  rail  tJush  with 
the  leg  stiles,  is  illustrated  in  Fig.  6.128  ot  Bivins. 

12.  William  Byrd  11,  William  Bird's  Histories  of  the  Dividing  Line  Betwixt  \irginia  and 
North  Carolina  (New  York:  Dover  Publications,  Inc.,  1967),  96. 

13.  The  will  of  Thomas  Pollock  documents  the  bequest  to  his  son  Cullen  ot  "five  thousand 
toot  ot  plank  which  I  have  sent  for  from  Boston."  J.  Bryan  Grimes,  Abstract  of  North  Carolina 
WilL  (Raleigh:  E.M.  Uzzell  &  Co.,  1910),  292-93. 

14.  Bivins,  502. 

15.  Halifiix  County  Inventories  and  Accounts  of  Sales.  183S-1842,  pp.  16^-68,  estate  of  W.  W. 
Jones,  February  session.  Court  of  Pleas  and  Quarter  Sessions. 

16.  Mark  J.  Anderson,  "A  New  Look  at  Sulfur  and  Other  Composition  Inlay."  Catalogue  of 
the  Chester  County  Historical  Society  Antique  Show  (U'est  Chester,  Pa..  199")),  p.  39- 

17.  Bivins.  p.  309.  fig.  6."!. 

18.  William  Luten  Account  Book,  i~64-i~8''.  manuscript.  North  Carolina  Department  ot 
Archives  and  History,  Raleigh. 

19.  Hendrick  Hondius,  Instruction  en  la  science  de perspective.  The  Hague,  1623.  cited  and  il- 
lustrated in  Peter  Thornton,  Seventeenth-Century  Interior  Decoration  in  England.  France,  and 
Holland  (New  Haven,  Conn.:  Yale  Universin,'  Press.  1978).  207. 

20.  Bivins.  fig.  S.19. 


90  JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


Research  Note 


The  Virginia  Career  of  Jacob  Marling 

J.     CHRISTIAN     KOLBE    AND 
LYNDON     H.    HART    III 


THE  LIVES  OF  MANY  PAINTERS  in  eighteenth- and  ear- 
ly nineteenth-century  America  are  difficult  to  document, 
and  biographical  information  on  artists  is  at  best  often 
sketchy.  The  fact  that  many  of  these  artists  were  itinerant  helps  ex- 
plain the  scarcity  of  records  documenting  their  careers.  Jacob  Mar- 
ling is  unusual  in  that  a  fairly  complete  picture  of  his  work  in  Vir- 
ginia can  be  documented.  His  career  as  a  painter  spanned  a  period  of 
thirty-eight  years  (1795-1833)  in  Virginia  and  North  Carolina.'  A 
painting  of  the  North  Carolina  state  house-  and  a  painting  of  a 
meeting  of  the  Raleigh  Female  Academy,  titled  The  Crowning  of  Flo- 
ra^ (^^.  i)  have  been  documented  as  his  work,  and  numerous  por- 
traits in  widely  differing  st)'les  have  been  attributed  to  him.^  Mar- 
ling's  Virginia  career  covers  the  years  1795  to  1813,  but  none  of  his 
paintings  done  in  Virginia  have  been  documented.  This  essay  docu- 
ments Marlings  life  and  work  in  Virginia  by  examining  manuscript 
sources. 

Marling  advertised  his  services  to  teach  drawing  and  painting  in 
the  8  May  1795  issue  of  the  Virginia  Herald  and  Frederickburg  Adver- 
tiser, stating  that  for  the  last  seven  years  he  had  studied  under  fames 
Cox   in   Philadelphia.'  The   1794   Philadelphia  citv  directorv  lists 


I.  Jacoh  Marling.  The  Crowning  of  Flora,  oil  on  cdiivas,  H()A  )o' 8  ",  W'OA 

^9'  8  ",  Courtesy  of  the  Chrysler  Museuni  of  Art,  Norfolk,  Virginia,  gift  of  Edgar 

Willidtii  and  Beruice  Chrysler  Garhisch.  Ace.  S0.1Sr.26. 

James  Cox  as  a  drawing  master  living  at  G}  Wilnut  Street."  Marling 
next  ad\-ertised  in  the  28  July  179s  issue  of  the  Ricl'Dioiid  Chronicle 
that  he  was  teaching  drawing  and  painting.  In  a  notice  in  the  27 
April  1796  Richmond  and  Manchester  Advertiser,  as  well  as  advertising 
that  he  taught  drawing  and  painting,  Marling  stated  that  for  a  year 
he  was  en<iatred  to  teach  \'ouno  ladies  one  da\-  a  week  in  Petersburg." 


92 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    1996 


With  this  notice  began  MarHng's  prolonged  sojourn  in  one  ot  the 
tew  major  towns  in  southside  Virginia.  The  following  transcription 
of  a  notice  in  the  19  May  1797  issue  of  the  Virginia  Gazette  &  Peters- 
burg Intelligenc'ier  is  typical  of  the  advertisements  Marling  placed  in 
newspapers.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  he  was  willing  to  teach  in 
the  surrounding  counties."  Perhaps  this  offers  a  clue  as  to  how  Mar- 
ling met  his  future  wife,  Louisa  Simmons  of  Southampton  County. 

J.  MARLING, 

RESPECTFULLY  informs  the  inhabitants  of  PETERSBURG  and  its 
vicinity,  that  he  still  continues  his  SCHOOL  for  the  tuition  of 
young  Ladies  and  Gentlemen  in  the  elegant  art  of  DRAWING  and 
PAINTING,  through  all  its  various  branches.  In  the  education  of 
youth,  especially  the  female  sex,  this  beautiful  accomplishment 
ought  not  to  be  neglected,  as  it  at  once  affords  a  constant  source  of 
variegated  amusement  and  pleasure.  He  also  professes  to  take 
LANDSCAPES  and  MINIATURE  PAINTINGS,  on  the  most  reason- 
able terms.  He  will  wait  on  any  person  at  their  own  house,  where  it 
is  not  convenient  or  agreeable  for  them  to  attend  his  public  School. 


He  would  have  no  objections  to  a  School  in  the  country,  not  far- 


ther  distant  than  thirty,  or  forty  miles,  provided  a  sufficient  number  o 

of  Scolars  could  be  obtained,  so  as  to  make  it  worthv  the  inconve-  S 

X 


nience  and  trouble  that  must  necessarily  accompany  such  an  under- 
taking. His  attendance  will  be  one  day  each  week  to  a  country  5 
school,  so  it  cannot  interfere  with  his  engagements  in  town.  C/> 

>i 

Petersburg,  May  3,  1797  g 

N.B.  His  School  House  is  in  BoUingbrook  Street,  nearly  opposite  fe 

the  Printing  Office.'" 

e 

It  was  not  long  before  Marling  found  himself  in  financial  difficul-  |  2 

ties,  a  situation  which  seemed  continually  to  plague  him.  On  27 
June  1796,  Marling  signed  a  promissory  note  saying  he  would  pay 
Charles  Cox  six  pounds  that  he  had  borrowed  from  him.  In  the  20 


THE    VIRGINIA    CAREER    OF    JACOB    MARLING  93 


March  1798  session  of  the  court  of  Chesterfield  County,  a  summons 
was  issued  to  MarHng  to  appear  in  court  on  the  second  Monday  in 
April  and  to  pay  his  debt  to  Cox."  A  chancery  suit  in  Southampton 
County  reveals  that  Marling  became  involved  in  financial  difficulties 
in  the  years  1799-1800.  The  deposition  of  John  Brewer  stated  that 
Marling  was  indebted  to  him  for  boarding,  tor  which  Marling  en- 
tered into  a  bond.  According  to  Brewer's  deposition,  Marling 
opened  another  account  with  Brewer,  which  he  was  allowed  to  pay 
with  painting.  Marling's  work  was  valued  at  fifty  dollars.  Brewer 
claimed  that  even  after  the  fifty  dollars  worth  oi  work,  a  balance  re- 
mained on  the  open  account,  and  that  the  bond  for  the  closed  ac- 
count had  not  been  paid.'- 

The  depositions  of  Joseph  P.  Pool  and  Robert  Walker  during  this 
suit  provide  further  information  on  Marling.  In  his  deposition.  Pool 
stated  that  in  the  fall  or  winter  of  1799,  Marling  did  three  drawings 
for  John  Brewer.  The  three  drawings  were  of  Brewer  and  each  of  his 
daughters.  Pool  said  he  thought  that  the  work  was  worth  about  sev- 
enty dollars  and  that  Mr.  Wiirrell,  another  portrait  painter  in  the 
Richmond-Petersburg  area,  charged  thirty  dollars  tor  a  grown  person 
and  twenty  or  twenty-five  dollars  for  children."  The  Dinwiddie 
County  personal  tax  for  1815  lists  John  R.  Brewer  as  owning  rwo  oil 
portraits,  rsvo  pictures  over  twelve  inches,  and  two  pictures  under 
twelve  inches  with  gilt  f-rames." 

Robert  Walker  stated  that  in  the  fall  of  1800,  Brewer  approached 
him  about  taking  tickets  in  a  lottery  for  paintings  belonging  to  Mar- 
ling. The  paintings  were,  in  effect,  raffled  to  cover  Marling's  debts. 
As  Brewer  owed  him  ten  dollars.  Walker  subscribed  tor  two  tickets 
at  five  dollars  each,  and  Brewer  paid  the  ten  dollars  to  Marling. 
Brewer  then  proposed  to  join  Wilker  in  a  partnership  and  bought 
two  additional  tickets.  Walker's  two  tickets  won  prizes,  and  Brewer's 
tickets  were  blanks.  Walker  was  so  pleased  that  he  paid  Brewer  fift)' 
dollars  tor  his  interest." 

The  following  transcription  lists  the  paintings  and  prints  owned 
by  Marling,  with  their  value,  that  were  sold  at  the  lottery.  It  also  in- 


94  JOURNAL   OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE   ARTS  SUMMER    1996 


eludes  the  the  names  of  the  subscribers  who  bought  the  fifty-six  tick- 
ets.'" The  paintings  Hsted  indicate  that  Marling  did  various  types  of 
work.  The  historical  works  may  have  been  copied  after  paintings  by 
John  Trumbull,  who  painted  historical  and  religious  scenes,  as  well 
as  portraits  and  landscapes. 


A  Lottery  for  Paintings  and  Prints 

Two  Elegant  Paintings  one  representing  the  Battle  at  Bunkers  hill  near 
Boston,  and  the  other  the  death  of  General  Montgomery  before  Quebec, 
also  two  prints  representing  the  Same,  Elegantly  framed,  one  dutch  view, 
one  landscape  taken  near  Petersburg,  one  rushan  Shepherd,  one  french 
ditto  and  two  fancy  pieces. 


VIZ 

56  Tickets 

S5 

$280 

I  prize  I  0 

i  Each  the  Painting 

No.  I 

120 

I  ditto  I  " 

2 

[] 

I  ditto  3 

[] 

[] 

I  ditto  Landscape 

4 

20 

I  ditto  ru! 

;han  Shepherd 

5 

20 

I  ditto  French  ditto 

6 

16 

I  ditto  2  fancy  pieces 

7 

$6 

$280 

I 

Ro  Walker 

H 

J.  Faircloth 

2 

Geo  Pegram 

IS 

B.  Edwards 

3 

B.  Ncholson 

16 

Wm.  Thompson 

4 

Jos.  P  Pool 

17 

James  Hodges 

5 

James  Geddy  Jr. 

18 

Saml.  White 

6 

John  Nicholas 

19 

Edwd.  Holmes 

7 

Ro.  Lorton 

20 

Saml.  White 

8 

Jno.  Arbuckel 

21 

E.  Dillard 

9 

S.  Taylor 

22 

Nat.  Friend 

ID 

N.  Herbamont 

23 

John  Nicholas 

II 

Sp.  Hinton 

^4 

W  Johnson  for 

J.R. 

12 

Peter  Wilson 

Brewer 

13 

Capt  Wm  Wells 

25 

Capt.  Moore 

THE    VIRGINIA    CAREER    OF    JACOB    MARLING 


95 


26   [ohn  Page 
17  Wm.  Johnson 

28  Jas.  Fleming 

29  Ben  Marshall 

30  Rob.  Smith 

31  [no  R.  Brewer 

32  FitzP 

33  Wm  Fraser 

34  Thos  Field 

35  Capt.  Lorton 

36  Mrs.  Adams 

37  R.  Ellis 

38  R.  Ellis 

39  Archd.  Walker 

40  Jno.  R.  Brewer  sell 

41  Jno.  R.  Brewer 


42  M.  Maben 

43  Ro.  Watkins 

44  Jno.  McRae  Jr. 

45  Wm  Johnson 

46  [  ?  ]  Smith 

47  E  Jimmerson 

48  Ro.  Walker 

49  E  Deane 

50  Tho  Wilcox 

51  John  Beckley 

52  [no.  Bank 

53  J.  Warrell 

54  R  Wilkinson 

55  N.  Fitzshu 

56  John  Kev 


Undaunted  by  his  financial  difficulties.  Marling  advertised  again 
in  the  16  April  1801  issue  oi  the  Republican.  He  stated  that  examples 
of  his  work  could  be  seen  at  his  lodgings  at  Mr.  T.  Lorton's  in  Old 
Street.'^ 

In  1803,  Erastus  Deane,  a  Petersburg  merchant,"  assigned  a  debt 
ot  iv3.4'  2  due  him  trom  Marling  to  Seth  R.  Kneeland  of  New  York. 
The  description  of  this  debt  as  seen  below  provides  further  informa- 
tion on  Marling's  painting  activities. 


Mr.  Jacob  Marling 
to  Erastus  Deane,  Dr. 


1800       To  2  \'ds  India  Cotton 
Julv  9      I  Drawing  Book 


2/  4 

I   10 


1801        Saddle  and  Bridle 
Feby  7    2  Boxes  paints  opaque 

Satin  to  paint  one  apron  on 
int.  there  on 


3   13 

18 

7  6 

5-  3-  4" 


96 


JOURNAL    OF    E.\RLY    SOUTHERN    DECOR.ATIVE    .-kRTS 


SUMMER    1996 


"Opaque  paints"  probably  refers  to  a  tempera  type  of  paint  used  in 
watercolor  painting.  The  opaque  paints  and  drawing  book  suggest 
that  Marling  was  conducting  painting  classes  for  young  ladies.  The 
reference  to  the  "satin  to  paint  one  apron"  may  be  a  reference  to 
painted  Masonic  aprons.-" 

By  1805,  Marling  had  married  Louisa  Simmons  from  Southamp- 
ton County,  Virginia.  Louisa  was  the  daughter  of  Edwin  Simmons 
and  his  wife  Rebecca  nee  Simmons.-'  The  personal  property  tax  lists 
for  Southampton  Count)'  show  Marling  as  an  inhabitant  for  the 
years  1806-1807."  Marriage  to  Louisa  brought  Marling  I05y2  acres 
of  land  and  a  slave  named  Ginn.  Louisa  had  received  this  property  as 
one  of  her  father's  heirs.-'  Marling  also  purchased  a  parcel  of  land 
from  Edwin  Simmons's  estate  and  s'  2  acres  from  Edwin's  widow,  Re- 
becca Simmons.  In  1807,  Marling  was  in  debt  for  a  tract  of  land  he 
had  purchased;  he  mortgaged  his  tract  of  205 '4  acres.-'  Apparently 
Marling  was  able  to  redeem  his  land,  and  in  1808  he  sold  his  entire 
holdings,  which  consisted  of  205  acres,  to  Peter  Simmons.-'  Marling 
was  also  indebted  to  John  Urquhart  for  twenty  pounds,-"  and  mort- 
gaged a  slave,  Jenny,  who  was  listed  in  the  estate  division  of  his  fa- 
ther-in-law Edwin  Simmons. 

In  the  March  1809  court  of  Southampton  County,  Marling  sued 
Samuel  Blunt,  administrator  of  the  estate  of  Robert  Goodwyn,  de- 
ceased. In  1808,  Marling  had  painted  portraits  of  "Mrs.  Goodwin 
and  his  son "  and  he  had  not  been  paid  the  one  hundred  dollars  owed 
to  him  for  this  work.'  Robert  Goodw\'n's  widow,  Susanna,  remar- 
ried in  1809  to  Benjamin  Cobb.'"  In  the  1815  personal  property  tax 
list,  Benjamin  Cobb  was  taxed  for  three  oil  portraits,' '  two  of  which 
are  likely  to  be  the  ones  in  the  suit  and  which  would  have  become 
part  of  Cobb's  taxable  propert}'  through  his  marriage  to  the  widow 
Goodw)'n. 

In  the  September  1810  court  for  Southampton  County,  Marling 
again  sued  Samuel  Blunt,  this  time  as  executor  of  the  estate  of  Dr. 
James  Irwin.  In  1806,  Marling  had  painted,  at  the  request  of  Dr. 
James  Irwin,  a  portrait  of  Arthur  Irwin  for  thirty  dollars  but  had  not 
yet  been  paid.'"  As  Arthur  is  not  mentioned  in  the  will  of  Dr.  Irwin 
or  in  any  other  county  record,  we  presume  that  he  is  a  son  who  died 
young." 

THE    VIRGINIA    CAREER    OF    JACOB    MARLING  97 


By  1808,  Marling  had  left  Southampton  Count)'  and  returned  to 
Petersburg.  In  the  27  July  1808  issue  of  the  Republican,  he  advertised 
that  he  painted  quarter-  to  full-length  portraits  and  landscapes.  The 
advertisement  further  stated  that  he  would  open  a  school  of  drawing 
and  painting  for  young  ladies  at  the  house  of  Messrs.  Hammon  and 
Daniel  on  Old  Street.'^  From  18  October  1808  through  24  February 
1809,  Marling  advertised  in  the  Petersburg  Intelligencier  that  he  was 
operating  a  drawing  and  painting  school  for  young  ladies  and  that 
he  did  portraits  and  landscape  painting." 

Financial  difficulties  continued  for  Marling.  In  a  deed  recorded 
April  1809  in  Petersburg,  he  mortgaged  his  household  furnishings  to 
repay  a  debt  of  £1.19.0,  which  was  owed  to  Rebecca  Simmons,  his 
mother-in-law.''  In  December  1809,  Marling  mortgaged  lot  131, 
which  was  on  the  plan  of  lots  between  Center  Hill  and  Poplar 
Spring.''  Marling  had  also  become  indebted  to  Charles  Cox  for  the 
sum  of  £23.12.0.  In  the  June  1810  court  for  Chesterfield  Count)',  a 
summons  was  issued  for  the  sheriff  to  seize  Marling's  riding  chair, 
which  was  valued  at  £11.19.3.  The  sheriff  was  also  ordered  to  seize 
one  leather  bed,  one  dozen  Windsor  chairs,  and  a  settee  valued  at 
£11.16.0."  Also  in  June  1810  in  the  court  of  Southampton  County, 
Marling  brought  suit  against  Peter  Simmons  for  debts." 

The  1815  personal  property  tax  list  of  Virginia  represents  the  first 
time  that  the  state  taxes  listed  by  category  luxury  items  such  as  por- 
traits, and  the  information  it  contains  casts  an  interesting  light  on 
Marling's  relations  with  Louisa  Simmonss  extended  family.  Of  the 
twelve  persons  listed  as  owning  portraits  in  the  Nottoway  Parish  sec- 
tion ot  Southampton  County,  six  were  connected  with  the  Simmons 
family  (see  appendices  I  and  II).  These  six  individuals  owned  eleven 
of  the  nineteen  portraits  listed  on  the  tax  list.  The  personal  propert)' 
tax  lists  also  provide  the  number  of  slaves  in  certain  age  brackets. 
Taking  the  number  of  slaves  owned  as  an  indicator  of  wealth  (ap- 
pendix II),  these  individuals  seem  to  represent  a  wide  range  of  finan- 
cial circumstances,  from  extremely  wealthy  to  modest."  It  is  thus 
striking  that  they  represent  half  the  persons  owning  portraits  in  Not- 
toway Parish,  and  even  more  so  that  they  own  eleven  of  the  nineteen 
portraits  listed.  Even  considering  that  some  of  the  portraits  may 


98  JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


have  been  inherited,  the  situation  is  puz- 
zHng.  One  exphmation  may  be  that  Mar- 
Hng  needed  to  borrow  cash  or  goods,  espe- 
cially it  he  tried  his  hand  at  farming,  and 
the  extended  family  network  was  the  natur- 
al resource  to  turn  to  tor  aid.  Marling  may 
have  paid  back  debts  to  or  bartered  with 
family  members  by  painting  portraits. 

In  the  St.  Luke's  Parish  area  of  South- 
ampton County,  only  one  person  is  listed 
as  owning  a  portrait.  However,  given  the 
dimensions  for  some  oi  the  "pictures"  listed 
(see  appendix  111),  the  figure  being  tor  the 
breadth  ot  the  item,  the  term  picture  may 
mean  a  painting.''  There  is  only  one  Sim- 
mons connection  listed  as  having  a  picture 
in  the  St.  Luke's  Parish  area. 

Marling  last  appears  on  the  Petersburg 
personal  propertA'  tax  in  1811.  By  1812,  Mar- 
ling's  name  disappears  trom  the  Virginia 
personal  property  tax  records.^"  After  seven- 
teen years  in  Virginia,  Marling  left  Peters- 
burg and  moved  to  Raleigh,  North  Carolina.  Except  tor  a  briet  visit 
to  Charleston,"  Marling  remained  in  Raleigh  until  his  death  in  1833. 
His  career  there  is  fairly  well  documented,  and  it  is  known  that  he 
continued  his  painting  and  operated  a  museum.^'  A  notice  in  the  11 
August  1815  issue  ''  of  the  Raleigh  Minerva  and  the  inventory  ot  Mar- 
ling's  estate  (Appendix  IV)  list  a  number  of  paintings  done  by  the 
artist. 

Examination  of  the  Petersburg  lottery  ot  Marling's  works  (see 
page  4)  and  the  sales  account  ot  Marling's  estate^'  (see  Appendix  IV) 
may  assist  future  researchers  in  Virginia.  Both  documents  show  that 
Marling  painted  subjects  other  than  portraits,  including  historical 
paintings,  landscapes,  and  genre  scenes.  Marling's  estate  sale  account 
names  specific  sitters  tor  portraits,  including  Governor  Stokes, 
whose  portrait  has  been  recorded  by  MESDA  (fig.  2). 


2.  Jacob  Marling 
(attrib.).  Portrait  ot  Gov- 
ernor Montfort  Stokes, 
oil  on  canvas,  HOA  ijV-t  ", 
\\().\  24  ".  Courtesy  of  the 
North  Carolina  Museum 
of  History,  ace.  XX.  182.  i. 
Stokes  was  governor  of 
North  Carolina  from  iS^o 
to  lS}2. 


THE    VIRGINIA    CAREER    OF    JACOB    MARLING 


99 


In  the  North  Carolina  Portrait  Index  1700— 1860,  several  portraits  of 
widely  varying  styles  are  attributed  to  Marling. ""  If  adequate  docu- 
mentation is  available,  some  of  these  portraits,  along  with  the  por- 
trait of  Governor  Stokes,  would  provide  a  yardstick  by  which  surviv- 
ing Virginia  portraits  might  be  attributed  to  Marling.  Surviving 
Virginia  portraits  would  generally  date  prior  to  Marling's  removal 
from  Petersburg  in  1811-1812,  and  assigning  a  date  to  portraits  under 
investigation  would  be  aided  by  a  knowledge  of  contemporary  cloth- 
ing styles.  The  sitters  of  Marling's  Virginia  portraits  would  most 
likely  have  been  residents  of  Petersburg  or  southside  Virginia  coun- 
ties for  which  Petersburg  was  the  main  cultural  and  market  center.  It 
is  hoped  that  this  article  documenting  Marlings  lite  and  work  in 
Virginia  will  encourage  others  to  research  and  document  Marlings 
work  in  Petersburg  and  the  surrounding  counties. 

LYNDON  H.  HART  III,  the  Head  oj  Descriptive  Services  Brauch  at 
the  Library  of  Virginia  in  Richmond,  has  an  extensive  interest  in  the 
court  records,  architecture  and  families  oj  Southampton  Cou}it]i,  Vir- 
ginia.  j.  christian  koi.be,  rf  reference  archivist  at  the  Library  of 
Virginia,  is  an  alumnus  of  the  19^8  MESDA  Summer  Institute. 


JOURNAL   OF    EARLY   SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE   ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


APPENDIX   1 .    The  Extoided  Family  {by  Marriage) 
of  Jacob  Marlbig 


Sarah 

m. 

Joseph  Gr, 


Ehzahc-th 
AJbridgton  Jo 


John  Simmons 


Eleanor  Burcs  Mar)-  VC'ainwright      F.lizabcth  Spr. 


John  Sarah 

~  m. 

Nicholas  Williams 


William-      Edwin-  m.  Rebecca  Frances' 


Sarah 

Man- 

Louisa 

Humph 

m. 

m. 

m. 

Drewr 

Rev.  Hcnn 

William  Urquharr 

Jacob  Marl 

"g 

Jno  Burgcs 

1 
Eliz.  M.  Surges 

John  Urquharr' 

lichard  B.  Kello- 

John  Williams' 


APPENDIX   II.  Relative  Wealth  as  Indicated  by  the  Southampton 
Count)'  Personal  Property  Tax  Lists,  Nottoway  Parish,  i8i$ 


5/,,r« 

SL,r 

Over  16 

9-1. 

Benjamin  Cobb 

19 

2 

Benjamin  Devanv 

1 

Nancv  Foster 

2 

Edwin  Grav,  Sr.* 

U. 

3 

Lewis  P.  Hart 

} 

3 

Richard  Kello" 

7 

1 

Josiah  Murdaugh 

5 

5 

Rebecca  Simmons- 

3 

1 

William  Simmons' 

4 

2 

Drewr\'  Stith 

4 

John  Urquharr' 

11  >) 

9 

John  Williams- 

1 

Oil 

(jiiyoil 

Tohd 

Portr.uts 

Pormill! 

T.K 

3 

31.52 

1 

S.25 

1 

2.65 

1 

13.6- 

1 

8.87 

3 

14.61 

1 

4.83 

1 

6.96 

1 

7.59 

1 

7.17 

~ 

152.52 
1.97 

'Indicates  Simmons  Kimil 


THE    VIRGINIA    CAREER    OF    JACOB    MARLING 


APPENDIX    III.    Relative  Wealth  As  Indicated  by  the  Southampton 
CoiDity  Periaxial  Propert)!  Tax  Lists,  St.  Luke's  Parish,  iSi^ 


SImrs 

SUirs 

Oil 

Pnnh.  E 

IgTilrillgy 

Toll!/ 

9-12 

over  12 

Pomim 

Put 

,re> 

T.ix 

Humphrey  Drewry' 

17 

1 

2  ft. 

20.42  ': 

Lewis  Fort 

2 

18 

-i 

12  in. 

42.10 

James  Gee 

8 

37 

1 

3 

1 

2  iL 

3  tt. 
16  m, 

36.70 

Capt.  Jas  Harris 

1 

23 

18 

12  m. 

29.20 

Newitt  Harris  and 

Nathan  Harris 

6 

28 

8 

14  in. 

40.08 

Beniamin  W.  Johnsor 

\S 

17 

18  in. 

.^3.24 

Thomas  Newsom 

2 

24 

3 

20  in. 

30.02 

Stith  Nicholson 

3 

16 

1 

2(3  in. 

19.30 

Thomas  Ridley 

1 

14 

1 

2  ft. 

24.26 

Anne  G.  Wilkinson 

n 

8 

18  in. 

16.90 '2 

'  Indicates  Simmons  family  connection 


APPENDIX   IV,  Paintings  Cited  in  Jacob  Marling)  Estate  Inventory 

Account  of  Sale  &  Inventorv-  ol  Jacob  Marling         B\-  the  Administrator 
Description  of  painting  purchiner  priic 


1  painting  View  ol  Sea  Port 

\Xm  H.  Mead 

SI. 33 

1  fancy  peace  [piece] 

\Xm  H.  Mead 

2.20 

1  Painting 

John  G.  Marshall 

LIS 
LOS 

Wm  H.  Mead 

2.SS 

John  G.  Marshall 

4.60 

!    "           Gov  Stokes 

\S.'m  Buffaloe 

6.30 

1    ■■               "      Miller 

M  r  Sawyer 

2.2S 

1    "           ColGlinton 

G.W.  Ligon 

2.00 

1    "           Lorenzo  Dow 

Mr  Sawyer 

4.2S 

W.H.  Mead 

8. SO 

John  Beckwith 

.^..W 

John  G.  Marshall 

8.2S 

Dr  Beckwith 

3.30 

1     '            Dr.  McPheeters 

John  G.  Marshall 

S.OO 

1    "           Queen  of  May 

20. 2S 

1    "           Vi'atermellon 

Alford  Slade 

S.80 

Mr  Buffaloe 

4.40 

Mr  Taylor 

l.SO 

1    View  of  London 

John  G  Marshall 

4.2S 

1    Painting 

E.  Smith 

2.00 

Onh  refhrnn-i  to p,?itittngs  luteti  iii  Miir/iiig's  inventor,-  we 


■ihfd  ami  included  iihove. 


JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS 


SUMMER    19  9  6 


NOTES 

1.  Museum  (it  \L,u\v  Southern  Decor.irivc  Arts.  Iiu/t'x  to  I'lirly  Snntht-rn  Artists  tind  ArtiSiDis 
(Winston-Silcm,  N.C.:  MESDA,  19),  cntr\  tor  Jacob  Mjrling. 

2.  Jessie  Poesch.  The  Art  of  the  Old  South:  Painting.  Sculpture.  Arehitcitiirc  j/itl  the  I'rntluets 
of  Craftsmen  1^60— 1S60  (New  York:  Knopf,  1983),  121-12. 

5.  Davida  Deutsch,  "The  Crowning  of  Flora,"  The  Lu>ninaij:  The  Newsletter  of  the  .Muse- 
um of  Early  Southern  Decorative  Arts.  9,  No.  2  (Summer  1988):  3-4. 

4.  Ben  F.  Wilhams,  Jacob  Marling:  Early  North  Carolina  Artist  (Raleigh:  North  Carohna 
Museum  of  Art.  1964). 

5.  \'irginta  Herald  C  Erederickshurg  Advertiser,  8  May  i~9s,  4-3. 

(1.  James  Hardlc.  The  Philadelphia  Director,'  and  Register.  2d  ed.  (Philadelphia:  Jacob  John- 
son &  Co..  i~94).  33. 

~.  Richmond  Chronicle.  18  July  i'"95,  3-4. 

8.  Richmond  and  Manchester  Advertiser.  1-  April  i~96.  4-2. 

9.  Virginia  Gazette  C~  Petersburg  Intelligencier.  19  May  i'"9~,  2-3. 

10.  Ibid. 

11.  Chesterfield  County  De.id  Papers  IJudgments],  April  Court  i"'9S,  in  the  Library  ot  Vir- 
ginia, formerly  \irginia  State  Librar\-  and  Archives,  .Archives  Division,  Richmond  (hencchirth 
cited  as  LVA). 

12.  Southampton  County^  Chancery  Papers.  iSio.  LVA. 

13.  Ibid.  James  Warrell  was  an  artist  working  in  the  Richmond  and  Petersburg  area.  George 
C.  Groce  and  David  H.  Wallace,  eds..  The  New  York  Historical  Society's  Dictioiiaiy  of  Artists  in 
America  (New  Haven:  Yale  University  Press,  193"),  662. 

14.  Personal  Property  Taxes,  Dinwiddle  Countv',  1S15,  LVA. 

15.  Southampton  Countv  Chancen-  Papers.  iSio.  L\'A. 

16.  Ibid 

17.  Republican.  Petersburg,  Virginia.  16  April  1801,  1-3. 

18.  Personal  Property  Taxes,  Petersburg.  1800.  LVA. 

19.  Southampton  Counn'  ludgments,  1801,  LVA. 

20.  This  possibilitv  u'as  suggested  b\'  XvTialex-  Batson,  MESDA  paintings  consultant,  in 
October  1994. 

21.  Southampton  CountA'  Chancen,'  Papers,  1806,  LVA. 

22.  Personal  Property  Taxes.  Southampton  Counr,',  1806-1S07,  LVA. 

23.  Southampton  County  Chanceiy  Papers.  1806.  LVA. 

24.  Southampton  Countv-  Deed  Book  11,  1S03-1809,  298-99. 
2';.  Ibid..  549-50. 

16.  Ibid..  633. 

27.  Southampton  County  Judgments.  1811.  LVA. 

28.  Catherine  Lindsay  Knorr,  Marriage  Bonds  and  Ministers  Returns  of  Southampton  Coun- 
ty. Virginia  (Pine  Bluff,  Ark.:  Perdue.  1955),  28. 

29.  Personal  Property  Taxes,  Southampton  Countv,  Nottowav  Parish.  i8is,  L.\'A. 

30.  Southampton  Count)' Judgments,  1810,  LVA. 

31.  Southampton  Countv-  Will  Book  6,  1804-1810,  659. 

32.  Republican.  Petersburg,  Virginia,  27  July  1808,  4-1. 

33.  Petersburg  Intelligencier.  18  October  1808,  3-4. 

34.  Petersburg  Deed  Book  3.  1801-1811,  449. 

35.  Ibid..  4S4-85. 

36.  Chesterfield  Count)-  Dead  Papers  [ludgments],  1810,  L\'A. 


THE    VIRGINI.\    CAREER    OF    JACOB    MARLING  IO3 


37-  Southampton  Counrv' Judgments,  1810,  LVA. 

38.  Personal  Propem'  Taxes,  Southampton  Count)',  Nottoway  Parish,  1815,  LVA. 

39.  Personal  Propert)' Taxes,  Southampton  Count)',  St.  Luke's  Parish,  i8is.  LVA. 

40.  Personal  Property  Taxes,  Southampton  County  and  Petersburg,  1811-1812.  LVA. 

41.  Courier,  Charleston,  South  Carohna,  20  January  iSu),  2-4. 

42.  Poesch,  The  Art  of  the  OU  South.  121-22. 

43.  The  Raleigh  Minerva.  11  August  i8h. 

44.  Sales  account  ot  the  estate  of  Jacob  Marling,  1838,  in  Wake  Counp,-,  North  Carolina, 
Record  of  Wills  and  Inventories;  Settlement  oFEstates,  1834-1841,  volume  23,  pp.  303-4. 

45.  Laura  MacMillan.  comp..  North  Carolina  Portrait  Index  (Chapel  Hill:  Universin-  ot 
North  Carolina  Press,  1963). 


104  JOURNAL   OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE   ARTS  SUMMER    1996 


Book  Reviews 


Rockbridge  County  Artists  and  Artisans 

BARBARA     CRAWFORD    AND     ROYSTER     LYLE,     JR. 

Charlottesville:  University  Press  ot  Virginia,  1995.  Pp.  254;  19  col- 
or, 257  black-and-white  illustrations.  Cloth,  $62.50.  isbn  0-8139- 
1638-0. 

Rockbridge  County,  Virginia,  named  after  its  famous  landmark 
Natural  Bridge,  is  not  widely  known  as  a  center  for  the  production 
of  the  fine  or  decorative  arts  during  the  late  eighteenth  and  early 
nineteenth  centuries.  It  was  simply  not  Philadelphia  or  Charleston. 
No  rural  county,  especially  west  oi  the  Blue  Ridge,  was.  What  Bar- 
bara Crawford  and  Royster  Lyle,  Jr.,  have  demonstrated  in  Rock- 
bridge County  Artists  and  Artisans,  however,  is  that  portraiture,  land- 
scape, and  the  manufacture  of  textiles,  furniture,  clocks,  rifles, 
ironwork,  and  pottery  were  as  vital  to  life  in  small  town  and  farming 
communities  as  they  were  essential  to  the  defining  elements  ot  urban 
culture.  Moreover,  the  objects  with  which  men  and  women  worked, 
decorated  their  homes,  and  made  their  lives  more  manageable  or 
comfortable  were  not  created  in  the  isolation  usually  associated  with 
rural  and  small  town  life.  Rather,  they  reflected  the  cultural  currents 
that  may  have  emanated  from  urban  places  but  swept  the  entire 
Atlantic  world  during  the  late  eighteenth  and  early  nineteenth  cen- 
turies, propelled  by  the  consumer  revolution,  the  industrial  revolu- 
tion, and  the  Georgian  revolution's  progressive  infusion  of  neoclassi- 
cal styles.  Rockbridge  County  Artists  and  Artisa?is  is  an  important 
book  about  a  place  made  important  by  the  men  and  women  who 
fashioned  its  material  culture  as  both  producers  and  consumers. 


105 


The  book  opens  with  sixteen  pages  ot  color  plates,  featuring  land- 
scapes of  Rockbridge  County,  including  images  of  Natural  Bridge; 
sculpture,  most  notably  Edward  Valentine's  recumbent  statue  oi 
Robert  E.  Lee;  architectural  renderings;  and  examples  of  some  oi  the 
strongest  statements  in  furniture,  pottery,  manuscript  decoration, 
and  needlework  made  by  Rockbridge  artisans.  Separate  chapters  on 
the  fine  arts,  textiles,  furniture,  tall  clocks,  rifles,  ironwork,  and  pot- 
tery follow.  The  chapter  on  ceramics,  contributed  by  Kurt  C.  Russ, 
features  archaeological  evidence  as  well  as  fulsome  descriptions  oi 
styles  and  production  methods  for  earthenwares  and  stonewares. 
Hundreds  of  photographs,  many  of  objects  from  local  private  collec- 
tions and  others  from  well-known  museums,  amply  and  exquisitely 
ilkistrate  the  text.  The  volume  concludes  with  detailed  biographies 
of  nearlv  four  hundred  men  and  women  artists  or  artisans  whose 
work  contributed  to  making  the  material  culture  ot  Rockbridge 
County  so  worthy  of  study  and  whose  careers  speak  loudly  ior 
Crawford  and  Lyles  concern  not  only  f"or  objects,  but  also  ior  the 
people  who  produced  them. 

The  biographies  also  testify  to  the  careful  scholarship  the  authors 
invested  in  their  study.  They  have  made  wise  and  excellent  use  oi 
sources,  including  probate  inventories  and  account  books,  which  are 
often  detailed  in  material  descriptions  but  are  otherwise  so  resistant 
to  nuanced  insight.  Their  text  is  amplified  in  numerous  instances  by 
technical  discussions  of  crafts,  such  as  counterpane  or  coverlet  weav- 
ing, and  industrial  processes,  such  as  ironmaking  and  kiln  construc- 
tion. Perhaps  most  engaging  to  the  reader  looking  for  the  story  with- 
in the  story  are  the  social  histories  of  textile  production  or  oi 
furniture  makers  carefully  extracted  trom  ledgers,  accounts,  invento- 
ries, and  personal  papers.  The  high  qualir\'  oi  the  illustrations  and 
the  artful  design  of  the  book  will  win  for  it  a  rightful  place  on  many 
coffee  tables,  but  the  thoughtful,  insightful  text  and  illustrations  that 
not  only  please  but  can  be  studied  as  material  evidence  will  also  po- 
sition the  volume  prominently  on  many  scholars'  working  book- 
shelf 


I06  JOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


Although  Rockbridge  Count)/  Artists  tiiid  Artisans  is  organized  con- 
ventionally into  separate  chapters  on  different  object  groups,  many 
useful  ideas  inform  the  entire  volume.  Crawford  and  Lyle,  for  exam- 
ple, argue  throughout  their  text  that  p/iice  matters  in  the  emergence 
and  development  of  material  culture.  Designs,  forms,  technologies, 
and  traditions  evolved  in  Rockbridge  County  through  specific  fami- 
lies, businesses,  and  personal  relationships  and  within  established  in- 
stitutions of  commerce,  transportation,  church,  and  government.  In 
one  instance,  Crawford  and  Lyle  trace  the  evolution  of  the  chest 
form  in  Rockbridge  County  probate  inventories  from  its  earliest  ap- 
pearance as  a  simple  "chist"  with  a  hinged  top  through  its  progres- 
sive development  into  a  "chist  with  drawers"  and  finally  to  its  more 
evolved  form  as  a  "case  of  drawers"  by  the  early  nineteenth  century 
(p.  109).  In  another  example,  the  Whiteside  family  of  artisans  illus- 
trates how  artisanry  evolved  in  Rockbridge.  Moses  Whiteside  emi- 
grated from  England  or  Ireland  and  settled  in  the  Rockbridge  Coun- 
ty area  about  1750.  He  raised  two  sons,  Thomas  and  Moses,  on  his 
labor  as  farmer,  silversmith,  and  gunsmith.  Both  sons  became  clock- 
makers  and  after  Thomas  departed  for  the  West  in  the  early  nine- 
teenth century,  Moses  and  his  son  Samuel  carried  on  the  family 
business,  collaborating  with  a  number  of  cabinetmakers  in  the  pro- 
duction of  a  remarkable  series  of  clocks  and  cases  that  bear  the  im- 
print of  both  neoclassical  styles  and  unique  local  variations.  Proba- 
bly no  particular  place  in  Rockbridge  County  possessed  a  stronger 
pull  on  the  visual  arts  than  Natural  Bridge,  which  attracted  such  no- 
table American  painters  as  Frederick  Church.  Likewise,  artisans  and 
their  output  were  profoundly  influenced  by  educational  institutions, 
namely  Washington  and  Lee  University  (then  Washington  College), 
and  the  Virginia  Military  Institute  through  the  patronage  they  pro- 
vided or  the  heroic  culture  they  promoted. 

Through  numerous  examples  of  the  importance  of  place  in  the 
evolution  of  material  culture,  Crawford  and  Lyle  also  provide  strong 
evidence  for  the  connectedness  of  places  like  Rockbridge  County  to 
the  culture  of  ideas,  designs,  and  technologies  characterizing  the 


BOOK    REVIEWS  IQJ 


United  States  and  much  oi"  the  western  world  in  the  century  follow- 
ing the  American  Revolution.  The  county's  population  was  forged  in 
the  immigrant  waves  of  the  eighteenth  century,  in  which  English 
peoples  were  outnumbered  by  men  and  women  from  the  north  of 
Ireland  and  the  central  Rhine  Valley.  By  the  nineteenth  century  the 
county's  seat,  Lexington,  lay  at  the  intersection  of  what  was  arguably 
one  of  the  great  roads  of  early  national  America,  the  Philadelphia 
Wagon  Road  (later  the  Valley  Turnpike),  and  a  canal  system  that 
linked  the  town,  via  the  James  River,  eastward  to  Richmond  and  the 
wide  world  of  Atlantic  commerce.  Trade,  migration,  and  communi- 
cation all  brought  to  the  area  new  ideas  such  as  the  Pennsylvania  ri- 
fle, the  architectural  and  landscape  designs  ot  Andrew  lackson 
Downing,  and  the  renderings  of  Pennsylvania  sketchbook  limner 
Lewis  Miller  or  the  New  York-trained  artist  Lewis  P.  Clover,  Ir.  In 
his  chapter  on  pottery,  Russ  suggests  that  locally  produced  utilitarian 
stonewares  bore  the  singular  stamp  of  John  D.  Morgan,  who  was 
trained  at  the  Commeraw  pottery  at  Coerlear's  fiook,  Manhattan, 
and  "transplanted  a  strongly  Germanic-influenced  stoneware  tradi- 
tion to  rural  Rockbridge  County"  (p.  172). 

I  his  well-illustrated,  carefully  designed,  thoughtfully  crafted  book 
often  invites  the  reader  to  pause  and  wonder.  What  have  the  authors 
left  out?  Written  perhaps  for  the  people  who  know  Rockbridge 
County  best,  the  book  nonetheless  desperately  wants  a  map.  Nu- 
merous place  references  are  lost  on  the  uninitiated.  But  deeper  ques- 
tions about  space  and  place  might  trouble  the  geographer.  Rock- 
bridge County  in  the  late  eighteenth  and  early  nineteenth  centuries 
was  centered  in  the  world  of  dispersed  rural  communities  and  mar- 
ket towns  that  made  the  Shenandoah  Valley  distinctively  town-rich 
in  contrast  to  the  town-poor  Tidewater  and  Piedmont  regions  of 
Virginia.  Some  readers  may  want  to  know  more  about  how  artisan 
activity  varied  in  r)'pe  and  scale  according  to  the  hierarchical  geogra- 
phy created  by  farmer-artisans,  crossroad  shopkeepers  and  millers, 
and  market-town  merchants  and  manufacturers. 

The  attentiveness  and  thoroughness  of  Crawford  and  Lyle's  text 


JOl'RNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I  99  6 


also  engages  readers  with  questions  about  where  these  authors  are 
leading  scholarship  on  the  decorative  arts  and  material  culture.  Why 
limit  their  study  to  Rockbridge  County?  Did  county  lines  meaning- 
fully bound  the  exchange  of  ideas  and  methods  among  artists  and 
artisans?  No  doubt  Crawford  and  Lyle  would  be  the  first  to  argue 
that  their  work  indeed  stretches  the  scholar's  mind  horn  a  local  focus 
to  regional  considerations.  They  point  to  numerous  instances  in 
which  the  work  of  Rockbridge  artisans  drew  upon  sources  from 
throughout  the  Shenandoah  Valley  such  as  the  Winchester  furniture 
firm  of  Martin  and  Fry  or  the  Bell  family  of  potters  in  Strasburg. 
The  authors"  work  raises  new  possibilities  for  refining  understand- 
ings of  regionality  in  the  material  culture  of  Virginia,  distinguishing 
the  Vallev  from  eastern  Virginia  or  the  Appalachian  highlands  to  the 
west. 

Readers  may  also  wonder  about  the  absence  of  inclusive  dates  in 
the  volumes  title.  Crawford  and  Lyle  begin  their  examination  well 
before  Rockbridge  County's  formation  in  1778.  In  numerous  pas- 
sages scattered  throughout  the  text,  they  argue  that  a  consideration 
of  Rockbridge  artists  and  artisans  concludes  when,  for  instance, 
Connecticut  clocks  invaded  local  markets  in  the  1830s  and  displaced 
indigenous  clockmakers,  or  the  handmade  rifle  gave  way  to  ma- 
chine-made firearms  in  the  following  decades,  or  local  ironmakers 
could  no  longer  compete  with  the  industrial  giants  emerging  around 
Pittsburgh  in  the  years  following  the  Civil  War.  That  the  timing  in 
which  local  artisanry  gave  way  to  a  national  culture  ot  goods  was  er- 
ratic and  at  times  messy  is  only  testimony  to  the  importance  oi 
studying — as  Crawford  and  Lyle  have  done  so  well — the  things  peo- 
ple made  and  used  within  the  context  of  the  communities  that  gave 
these  things  meaning  and  identity. 

WARREN     R.     HOFSTRA 

Professor  of  History,  Shenandoah  Universit)' 


iOOK    REVIEWS  109 


Hopeful  Journeys:  Gerynan  Immigration,  Settlement,  and 
Political  Culture  in  Colonial  America,  ijiy-iyj^ 

AARON    SPENCER    FOGLEMAN 

Philadelphia:  University  of  Pennsylvania  Press,  1996.  Pp.  xii,  257; 
19  black-and-white  illustrations,  9  maps,  22  tables  and  graphs, 
appendix,  isbn  0-8122-3309-3  (cloth,  $34.95).  0-8122-IS48-6  (paper, 
$16.95)- 

Aaron  Spencer  Foglemans  study  employs  a  unique  approach  in 
assessing  the  impact  of  early  German  immigrants  on  American  soci- 
ety. Part  I  of  his  study  surveys  conditions  in  Europe  that  influenced 
migration  by  concentrating  on  the  relatively  small  area  of  the 
Kraichgau — some  fifty-three  parishes  between  the  Rhine  and 
Neckar  rivers — and  discussing  its  relevant  political  and  social  hictors 
in  detail.  The  emerging  pattern  of  economic  decline  that  eventually 
forced  migration  is  surprisingly  similar  in  most  parishes:  the  popula- 
tion consisted  chiefly  of  serfs;  they  practiced  subsistence  farming  for 
personal  and  local  consumption;  available  land  consistently  failed  to 
meet  nutritional  needs  as  the  population  increased;  lack  of  a  market- 
ing strateg)'  stymied  production  for  larger  markets;  opportunities  for 
economic  advancement  were  not  given;  starvation  or  emigration  re- 
mained the  seemingly  only  alternatives. 

Fogleman  concludes  that  once  the  decision  to  emigrate  was  made, 
the  villagers  rarelv  traveled  alone.  Instead,  whole  families  and  ex- 
tended families  emigrated  together,  providing  "the  framework  with- 
in which  the  connections  needed  for  successful  settlement  in  the 
colonies  were  established"  (p.  63).  By  studying  the  group  dynamics 
of  emigration  in  the  decision-making  process  of  several  families  and 
individuals,  Fogleman  presents  convincing  evidence  that  the  Kraich- 
gauers  "successfullv  left  behind  a  changing  world"  and  revived  some 
old  patterns  of  living  in  America  while  also  creating  fresh  ones  in 
their  new  world  (p.  13). 

The  thesis  of  the  books  second  section  is  that  once  the  immi- 
grants had  arrived  in  America,  they  "found  that  continuing  the  col- 


lOURNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


lective  strategy'  of  their  villages  best  suited  their  interests"  (p.  67). 
Using  graphs  and  maps  of  demographic  patterns,  Fogleman  shows 
that  German-speaking  immigrants  generally  settled  with  their  fami- 
lies and  extended  families  in  areas  already  chosen  by  other  Germans 
and  then  tended  to  remain  there,  helping  their  kin  and  friends  still 
overseas  with  relocation  to  the  "Neuland." 

This  finding  supports  the  charge  oi  "clannishness"  that  frequently 
has  been  levied  against  German-Americans,  but  the  author  also  fo- 
cuses on  a  number  of  exceptions  to  that  rule  and  concludes  that  the 
"traditional  communal  model'  for  early  American  settlement  does 
not  entirely  explain  the  German  immigrant  experience.  By  leaving 
the  community  to  try  and  improve  their  fortunes  .  .  .  German  emi- 
grants in  some  ways  took  the  ultimate  step  toward  becoming  model 
upwardlv  mobile,  self-interested  individualists"  (pp.  79-80).  Perhaps 
the  most  interesting  part  of  the  study  is  the  analysis  of  Moravian  set- 
dements  in  a  section  titled  "The  Radical  Pietist  Alternative."  Fogle- 
man details  the  "well  planned,  well  organized,  and  well  financed"  (p. 
121)  emigration  and  settlement  ot  the  Herrnhuters,  and  the  conflict 
between  Zinzendorf  "s  and  Muhlenberg's  followers  in  the  colonies. 

The  author  concludes  that  the  communal  model  of  setdement 
served  the  Germans  well.  They  supported  each  other  of  necessity, 
gained  persuasive  political  power  as  a  group,  and  influenced  the  po- 
litical structure  of  their  new  homeland  while  maintaining  their  Ger- 
man culture.  "But  the  real  basis  for  the  politicization  oi  the  German 
populace  during  the  colonial  period  lay  not  in  the  realm  ot  the  tradi- 
tional politics  of  officeholding,  consistent  voting  for  a  faction  or  par- 
ty, or  fighting  wars  for  empire  and  independence.  For  the  German 
immigrants,  instead,  politicization  was  linked  to  the  entire  process 
of  migration  from  Europe  and  setdement  in  the  countryside  of 
Greater  Pennsylvania"  (p.  150). 

Given  its  title,  one  might  expect  the  scope  to  include  the  char- 
tered colonies  bevond  that  of  Pennsylvania,  but,  except  for  the  ex- 
cursus on  the  Moravians,  this  is  not  the  case.  Here  Fogleman  could 
truly  have  added  significandy  to  our  knowledge.  The  study  tocuses 


!OOK    REVIEWS 


chiefly  on  German  immigration  to  Pennsylvania,  with  some  discus- 
sion of-  settlers  in  Virginia  and  North  Carolina.  Beyond  the  identifi- 
cation of  a  few  townships  in  Sotith  Carolina,  however,  the  state's 
German-speaking  immigrants  receive  litde  attention.  Yet  it  is  pre- 
cisely South  Carolina's  immigration  and  settlement  policy  that 
would  have  provided  an  interesting  contrast  to  the  developments  of 
her  neighboring  states  and  to  the  settlement  pattern  of  Pennsylvania. 

South  Carolina's  extensive  coastline  and  especially  Charleston's 
and  Port  Royal's  protected  natural  harbors  provided  a  safe  haven  for 
ocean-going  vessels  from  the  earliest  time  of  immigration  to  Ameri- 
ca, but  the  first  recorded  settlement  ot  Germans  in  the  area  of  to- 
day's South  Carolina  dates  to  1562.  In  that  year  Jean  Ribault,  leader 
of  a  Huguenot  band,  arrived  with  two  ships  carrying  the  Huguenots 
and  an  undetermined  number  of  Germans  from  Hessen  and  the  Al- 
sace and  founded  a  colony  at  "Port  Royal."  The  fortified  village 
named  Arx  Carolana  (Fort  Charles)  was  destroyed  in  1566  during  an 
attack  by  the  Spaniards,  but  German  immigration  continued  and  by 
1674  more  than  sixty  German  families  already  held  land  grants  in 
and  around  Charleston.  One  of  them  was  the  family  of  Edmund 
Bellinger,  who  later  became  a  surveyor.  After  John  Lederer  from 
Hamburg  first  mapped  the  southern  slopes  of  the  Appalachians  in 
Virginia  and  Carolina,  German  immigration  also  proceeded  over- 
land from  the  northeast  into  the  South  Carolina  midlands. 

Significant  differences  between  South  Carolina's  settlement  pat- 
terns and  those  of  Pennsylvania  emerged  with  the  colonial  govern- 
ment's aggressive  recruitment  of  German-speaking  setders  in  the 
eighteenth  century.  Seeking  protection  against  Spanish  encroach- 
ment from  the  west  and  security  against  Indian  attacks  on  outlying 
trading  posts,  the  government  offered  powerful  incentives  to  Ger- 
man-speaking immigrants  willing  to  settle  in  townships  that  would 
be  created  in  the  colony's  primeval  forests.  While  good  land  had  be- 
come scarce  in  Pennsylvania,  South  Carolina  could  easily  offer  free 
land  grants  of  fift}'  acres  per  head  to  immigrant  families,  free  tools 
and  farm  implements,  seed,  and  provisions  for  one  year.  Despite  the 


JOliRNAI.    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


often  severe  penalties,  professional  recruiters  scoured  the  European 
countryside  ior  willing  emigrants,  armed  with  pamphlets  and  testi- 
monials about  South  Carolina's  two-crops-a-year  climate,  her  beau- 
ty, and  abtmdant  resources.  From  Kocherthal's  Detailed lUid  Particu- 
lar Report  of  the  Famous  Province  Carolina  Situated  in  English 
America  (1706)  to  Purry's  Description  of  the  Province  of  South  Caroli- 
na (1731),  and  John  Tobler's  Beschreibung  von  Carolina  (Description 
oi  Carolina;  i/h).  the  state  was  depicted  as  the  promised  land  for 
Europe's  desperately  poor  populations.  So  many  sought  to  emigrate 
to  South  Carolina  that  the  phenomenon  was  described  as  an  illness: 
"Rabies  Caroliniae. " 

The  recruitment  was  successful.  Among  South  Carolina's  early 
German-speaking  setdements  were  the  "Saltketchers"  (1730-1740),  a 
few  score  German  families  that  settled  on  the  upper  Salkehatchie  as 
security  against  slaves  and  outside  enemies;  "Purrysburg"  (1732)  with 
a  large  proportion  of  German-speaking  setders  among  the  more 
than  600  inhabitants;  Orangeburg  and  Amelia  townships  (1735) 
with  250  Swiss  and  200  Germans  on  the  first  shipload;  New  Wind- 
sor (1737)  opposite  present-day  Augusta  on  the  Savannah  River  with 
prominent  resident  John  Tobler,  author  of  the  South  Carolina  Al- 
manack and  more  than  a  hundred  other  almanacs  printed  by  Ger- 
mantown's  Christopher  Sower  (Saur);  Saxe-Gotha  township  (17^7); 
the  "Dutch  Fork"  (i.e.,  Deutsch  Volk)  area  between  the  Broad  and 
Saluda  Rivers,  where  around  2,000  Germans  had  setded  by  1760; 
and  "Londonderry"  (1764)  on  Hard  Labor  and  Coffee  Town  Creeks. 
Somewhat  surprisingly,  most  of  these  settlements  in  the  backcountry 
had  Lutheran  or  Reformed  church  services  with  pastors  such  as  the 
reverends  Giessendanner,  Zauberbiihler,  Ziibly,  and  Theus  long  be- 
fore Charleston  had  its  first  German  church  (1764). 

Given  the  colony's  setdement  policy,  the  German-speaking  popu- 
lation was  involved  with  government  strategies  and  their  implemen- 
tation from  the  beginning.  Unlike  Pennsylvania's  German  populace 
as  described  by  Fogleman,  South  Carolina's  German  settlers  migrat- 
ed freely  and  often  within  the  state  and  beyond,  hardly  showed  hesi- 


BOOK    REVIEWS 


"3 


cation  in  dealing  with  or  criticizing  the  colonial  government,  and 
participated  actively  by  seeking  political  office  and  forming  political 
action  groups.  In  his  South  Carolina  Ah)ia)uick  o't  lyss-  Tobler  accus- 
es the  government  ot  being  self-serving  and  complains  that  "Law- 
Suits  are  most  intolerable  for  a  poor  Man"  and  even  he  who  has 
money  "will  suffer  Wrong,  rather  than  to  take  upon  himself  such  a 
Multitude  of  Pain,  Trouble,  Costs  and  Dangers"  by  seeking  legal  re- 
dress at  far-away  Charleston.  Tobler  was  a  justice  of  the  peace  at 
New  Windsor.  The  immigrants  frequently  "melted"  rapidly  in  the 
proverbial  ethnic  "pot"  and  sought  to  emulate  their  perception  of 
"English  gentlemen."  Often  they  anglicized  their  names  to  facilitate 
the  process.  Michael  Kalteisen,  founder  of  the  German  Friendly  So- 
ciety (1766),  one  of  America's  oldest,  still  active  organizations,  began 
his  political  career  as  carter  and  messenger  for  the  Commons  House 
of  Assembly  in  the  1750s  under  the  name  of  Coldiron.  He  became 
Wagon  Master  General  during  the  Cherokee  War,  and  at  his  house 
the  German  Fusiliers  were  founded  in  early  1775.  Like  his  friend  Pe- 
ter Bouquet  (or  Buche),  who  was  Purrysburg's  delegate  to  the  As- 
sembly, Kalteisen  was  elected  repeatedly  to  the  Provincial  Congress. 
Both  had  illustrious  political  careers  before  and  after  the  Revolution- 
ary War.  The  Rev.  J.J.  Ziibly,  who  had  married  |ohn  Tobler's  daugh- 
ter Anna  in  1746,  resided  for  some  time  in  New  Windsor  and  then 
served  various  churches  in  South  Carolina  before  being  called  to  the 
Independent  Church  in  Savannah.  He  was  Georgia's  delegate  to  the 
Continental  Congress  at  Philadelphia.  A  political  conservative  and 
faithful  to  his  oath  of  allegiance,  Ziibly  opposed  the  break  with  Eng- 
land, was  banished  from  Georgia  when  the  Revolution  began,  and 
went  into  hiding  until  Georgia's  royal  governor  was  reinstalled  in  Sa- 
vannah after  the  recapture  of  Savannah  by  British  troops  in  1779. 
Ziibly  died  in  1781.  The  Austrian  Adam  Treutlen  (1726-1782),  Geor- 
gia's first  and  "rebel"  governor,  was  in  some  ways  Ziibly's  counter- 
part. He  held  public  office  both  in  Georgia  and  South  Carolina  and 
was  drawn  and  quartered  by  Tories  on  his  South  Carolina  property 
in  Orangeburg. 


JOL'RNAL    OF    EARLY    SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE    ARTS  SUMMER    I996 


This  brief  survey  mentions  just  a  few  ot  the  substantial  number  oF 
South  CaroHna's  German-speaking  immigrants  who  participated 
prominently  in  the  political  process  before,  during,  and  shortly  after 
the  outbreak  of  the  Revolutionary  War,  thereby  apparently  differing 
from  the  Pennsylvania  settlers  Fogleman  discusses  in  detail.  Thev  set 
an  example  that  was  followed  in  subsequent  centuries  by  South  Car- 
olina's German-born  immigration  commissioner  John  Andreas  Wa- 
gener  and  the  states  German-born  mayors  and  congressmen,  too 
numerous  to  mention  here.  A  contrastive  treatment  would  have  en- 
hanced the  book  and  contributed  much  to  an  undeservedly  neglect- 
ed aspect  of  Atnerica's  early  German  immigration.  Hopeful  Joiinieys 
was  selected  by  the  Pennsylvania  German  Society  as  its  1996  annual 
publication  and  is  a  meticulously  researched,  carefully  annotated 
scholarly  work. 

HELENE     M.     K  A  STINGER     RILEY 

Alumni  Distinguished  Professor  of  German 
Clemson  University 


iOOK    REVIEWS 


THE    MUSEUM    OF    EARLY   SOUTHERN    DECORATIVE   ARTS 

Hobart  G.  Cawood,  President,  Old  Salem,  Inc. 

Frank  L.  Horton,  Director  Emeritus 

Sally  Gant,  Director  of  Education  and  Special  Events 
Ruth  Brooks,  Associate  in  Education 

Paula  Hooper,  Coordinator  of  Membership  Services 

Paula  W.  Locklair,  Director,  Department  of  Collections,  and  Curator 

Johanna  M.  Brown,  Assistant  Curator  and  Registrar 

Michelle  Fulp,  Collections  Assistant 

Bradford  L.  Rauschenberg,  Director,  Department  of  Research 

Nancy  Bean,  Office  Manager 

Jennifer  Bean-Bowen,  Prints  and  Slides  Assistant 

Martha  Rowe,  Research  Associate 

Virginia  S.  Hunt,  Librarian 

Wesley  Stewart,  Photographer 

Cornelia  B.  Wright,  Editor  of  Publications